>"The Flynn effect has been ongoing in Africa just as everywhere else. That's why between country IQ gaps based on relatively old data are about the same size as modern data, i.e., the Flynn effect speed is about the same."
>*no source*
Anyways, looking at the 2015 meta-analysis (supplementary table 2) and n-weighting all countries in a continent together, it does look like europe has gained about the same amount (if not slightly more) from the flynn effect as africa has:
"The Flynn effect has been ongoing in Africa just as everywhere else. That's why between country IQ gaps based on relatively old data are about the same size as modern data, i.e., the Flynn effect speed is about the same. "
Yes, the speed is the same, but the Flynn effect has been ongoing in the West for a longer time than in Africa. If two cars are driving at the same speed, can we conclude that they have covered the same distance?
Keep in mind that the Flynn effect is not just about individuals becoming used to testing. It's really about societies becoming used to testing and, more fundamentally, to thinking in terms of questions and answers. When I did my fieldwork in the late 1980s among elderly people in a small French Canadian community, I was warned against asking too many questions. It wasn't just that questioning might seem offensive or impertinent (although that could happen). It was also that the people themselves never questioned how things were done. There were "correct" ways of doing things, and you learned them by imitating a "master." That master could be your father, the priest, or a skilled artisan. The 20th century overturned that way of thinking, and competitive testing was part of that revolution.
In the West, the Flynn effect probably began in the late 19th century, when tests became widely used for entry into the civil service and for passing from one school grade to the next. In sub-Saharan Africa, it began much later, no earlier than the 1950s. At that time, only a minority of African children regularly sat for tests of any sort. Testing was a totally foreign idea for most of the population.
Every time I hear about the Flynn Effect I groan. Were our grandparents really retards? Obviously not.
Getting better at a certain kind of testing isn't the same as getting smarter at producing real world progress. Flynn Effect is obviously testing a kind of IQ that isn't linked to "intelligence".
Steve Sailor says economics is dependent on the fraction of the population above a cutoff. IIRC his number was 107. He calls it the Smart Fraction Theory.
Verbal IQ being the only thing that matters seems very unlikely. More likely that East Asians simply differ in some other aspect, like having lower openness to new ideas.
This is correct. Noah Carl wrote a piece critiquing Griffe's theory that verbal IQ matters most. IQ doesn't measure things like creativity. Many things go into how successful a people are. I'd argue even things like luck/geography plays a part.
>"The Flynn effect has been ongoing in Africa just as everywhere else. That's why between country IQ gaps based on relatively old data are about the same size as modern data, i.e., the Flynn effect speed is about the same."
>*no source*
Anyways, looking at the 2015 meta-analysis (supplementary table 2) and n-weighting all countries in a continent together, it does look like europe has gained about the same amount (if not slightly more) from the flynn effect as africa has:
(paper)
https://sci-hub.ru/https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691615577701
(supplements)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/suppl/10.1177/1745691615577701
If African Americans have and IQ of 85 with 20% white DNA, then 81 IQ or something like that seems reasonable for 100% African with proper nutrition.
"The Flynn effect has been ongoing in Africa just as everywhere else. That's why between country IQ gaps based on relatively old data are about the same size as modern data, i.e., the Flynn effect speed is about the same. "
Yes, the speed is the same, but the Flynn effect has been ongoing in the West for a longer time than in Africa. If two cars are driving at the same speed, can we conclude that they have covered the same distance?
Keep in mind that the Flynn effect is not just about individuals becoming used to testing. It's really about societies becoming used to testing and, more fundamentally, to thinking in terms of questions and answers. When I did my fieldwork in the late 1980s among elderly people in a small French Canadian community, I was warned against asking too many questions. It wasn't just that questioning might seem offensive or impertinent (although that could happen). It was also that the people themselves never questioned how things were done. There were "correct" ways of doing things, and you learned them by imitating a "master." That master could be your father, the priest, or a skilled artisan. The 20th century overturned that way of thinking, and competitive testing was part of that revolution.
In the West, the Flynn effect probably began in the late 19th century, when tests became widely used for entry into the civil service and for passing from one school grade to the next. In sub-Saharan Africa, it began much later, no earlier than the 1950s. At that time, only a minority of African children regularly sat for tests of any sort. Testing was a totally foreign idea for most of the population.
Every time I hear about the Flynn Effect I groan. Were our grandparents really retards? Obviously not.
Getting better at a certain kind of testing isn't the same as getting smarter at producing real world progress. Flynn Effect is obviously testing a kind of IQ that isn't linked to "intelligence".
Steve Sailor says economics is dependent on the fraction of the population above a cutoff. IIRC his number was 107. He calls it the Smart Fraction Theory.
The number was 106 and it is verbal IQ in the latest version.
http://www.lagriffedulion.f2s.com/sft2.htm
Verbal IQ being the only thing that matters seems very unlikely. More likely that East Asians simply differ in some other aspect, like having lower openness to new ideas.
This is correct. Noah Carl wrote a piece critiquing Griffe's theory that verbal IQ matters most. IQ doesn't measure things like creativity. Many things go into how successful a people are. I'd argue even things like luck/geography plays a part.