Something I don't understand. The first thing an antisemite usually does in conversation is refer you to the work of Kevin MacDonald. So I read him and it turns out that not only does he write that Jews do have a high IQ, this is a central part of thesis without which the entire group evolutionary strategy falls apart. And not only that, but he actually overestimates Jewish average IQ as being in the 120s! And not only that, but he extends this - clearly incorrectly - to Jews in general, not just Ashkenazim, and to Jews going back as far as Jews are an identifiable ethnic group.
So why don't antisemites attack KMac as being in the pocket of the Jews and peddling false myths of Jewish supremacy? Is it possible that they are illiterate retards?
Verbal tilt is a bit of a misnomer. 'Everything except spatial tilt' would be better. My pet theory is that the whole spatial intelligence thing is fake and they just put it in there to level out the playing field for gentiles.
Spatial ability is definitely not fake. You can see various ability scores for Project Talent in https://www.sebjenseb.net/p/jewish-iq-not-a-myth. Memory IQ was 100, spatial IQ was 99. I'm sure if one tested more aspects of intelligence, one would find more differences. Given the math IQ was 109, it is true that verbal tilt is somewhat of a misnomer.
It was a joke, and I think a funny one. And most white adults like this kind of humour which is why people watch Curb Your Enthusiasm and not Kenan and Kel. However, as with all jokes, there is an element of truth. If someone is really good at verbal reasoning and rubbish at everything else most people would say he is 'smart but dysfunctional'; if someone is good at maths but bad at everything else they would say the same. If someone has a good memory but is bad at everything else they say 'he has a good memory, but he's dumb'. If he has good spatial ability and he is bad at everything else, they say 'Jonny sure is good at packing them boxes'.
Thus common sense concurs with Kevin MacDonald. When we talk about intelligence as an actual causal factors in human affairs and not some dork academic construct, we basically mean verbal and mathematics.
Let me put it another way. In general, spatial ability and memory correlate well with mathematic and verbal reasoning. It therefore makes sense to put spatial and memory questions on IQ tests especially since they are less culturally loaded. However, if you come across an individual with a strong verbal/mathematical tilt it makes more sense to ignore the memory and spatial scores and just give him the maths/verbal score because this is what intelligence means in the real world. The same goes for someone who has a really strong memory/spatial tilt; you should give him the verbal/mathematical score. If you argue otherwise you are basically halfway to believing in multiple intelligences and saying joggers are just as smart as whites because they are better at basketball.
No, to argue otherwise is to accept general intelligence, the g factor. As far as I know, there is no MGCFA study of Jewish vs. gentile European intelligence, so we don't know the relative advantages on g. As you say, it appears Jews are high on crystalized (accumulated knowledge) ability, less so on fluid (spatial or memory). I would be interested in seeing processing speed, reaction time data, but as you know, it is very difficult to sample Jews for the purpose of giving them some specialized test.
Yeah, just as they are trying to level the playing field for men compared to women right? I think it's pretty clear that you are extremely bothered by the "anti-Semites" to a point where you come up with your own low IQ conspiracy theories.
You want to know what's funny? It's not actually my pet theory at all. It's a joke I made up while writing the comment, and then I thought about it and there's actually a pretty solid theory behind it. That's what it is to be Jewish, and it's why we are number 1 and you are not.
It's interesting that they're so often arrogant but really just moreso self-centered. Like they don't have an off switch that even I as an autistic recognize is there. Like even when they're trying to be humble, it comes off more as 'you don't get me' *sob* A sort of far more often feminine affect, likely from larger right-side brains.
similar to autistics, but differently they seem to lack social intuition. I would wonder if it's thousands of years of cultural preferential social exclusion.
"It was just a joke"..."Well actually there is a solid theory behind it"
There is no solid theory behind it. If you look at the results Emil linked to, removing spatial IQ from the equation wouldn't change the White-Jewish IQ desparity by any significant amount.
"What it means to be Jewish is to make up a stupid theory out of spite". If you insist...
Either there's a tilt or not. If Jews do better on maths and verbal intelligence and worse on memory and spatial ability, this just means that their IQ results underestimate their actual intelligence as the word is normally understood. This is what Kevin MacDonald thinks and I agree. If only KMac had some intelligent antisemites to keep him company, he probably wouldn't be so cranky all the time. Do better!
Well history shows clearly the asymmetry in the achievements of the" Jewish "people who lived in European Christian heritage countries and those that went into the Ottoman Empire and East Africa.
I'm not really sure what you are responding to, but these groups of "Jewish" people haven't achieved much because they aren't very smart. If it wasn't for Ashkenazi Jews, Jews would be just another weird Middle Eastern minority like Druze or Yazidis.
Precisely. But all of those (in your own words)not very smart" Jewish" people as well as the Ashkenazim are eligible for automatic citizenship of Israel based on the premise that they had a shared ancestry in the Middle East 2 millennia ago. The nature /nurture dynamic should be a given to explain their divergent paths.
Jews favor their own group, like all other normal humans — whites are unusual, arguably pathologically so, by making it a thing to promote members of outgroups and disfavor their own group. That by itself would account for Jews doing disproportionately well in white countries. Imagine playing a game that you’re already good at, AND your opponent cheats to help you win.
White nationalists are usually lower-IQ whites, but which favor their own group, which makes them absolve white liberals and basically sound like blacks who blame whites for everything.
In arguments, both philo- and anti-semites -- whether out of ignorance or mauvaise foi -- routinely conflate distinct issues: (1) the reason for Jewish overrepresentation in various fields (e.g., IQ vs. ethnic nepotism) and (2) the effect of Jewish ethnic identity on Jewish political behavior. At times, Cofnas has also critiqued Kmac's argument regarding (2) by arguing contra (1) -- a patently absurd line of reasoning. This would be equivalent to arguing that because South African Whites were more intelligent than Blacks, the political project of Apartheid South Africa was unrelated to White ethnic self-interest. I agree it is odd, though.
Cofnas' argument is that you don't need a special theory for why Jews are overrepresented in Left Wing political movements if they are also over-represented in a whole bunch of other things, you need a general theory. This is often misrepresented as him saying it's just about IQ, even though he said repreatedly that this wasn't the case.
The distinction you are making is correct, and it would be better if more people made it, but the fact is that KMac's theory itself collapses the distinction.
Kmac's argues: (1a) Jewish ethnocentrism shapes Jewish political behavioral, (1b) conditions a high degree of ethnic cohesion, (1c) and also inclines Jews towards ethnic nepotism; Jewish overrepresentation in certain societally influential positions results from both (2a) Jewish skill and (2b) ethnic nepotism; (3) Jews are able to realize their political interest -- to shape social norms and policies in line with ethnic interest -- due to a combination of their skill, cohesion, and social position. From this perspective, which primarily concerns (1a), the specific degree to which overrepresentation in various fields is due to skill vs. nepotism (2a-b) is unimportant. Would you disagree with this summary?
I think that's a fair summary, but it needs to be added that KMac's theory is not that Jews ascend to positions of power and *then* use that power to advance their ethnic interests it's that (a) they specifically seek out those positions of power to advance those ethnic interests and (b) they specifically promote left wing ideas and not just random ideas that promote their ethnic interest.
Now, (b) is where it gets slippy. The strong reading of KMac's thesis, and the one that he pretty clearly endorses in the trilogy is that leftism itself is an epiphenomena of Jewish evolutionary strategy in a white gentile society. This is open to fairly obvious objections, like massive Jewish over-representation in Italian fascism or American libertarianism to take only the most well documented examples. There are 2 basic strategies that KMac can use here. One is to basically say these are just random noise and aren't important; the second is to say these things are also part of the group evolutionary strategy. He mostly, especially in the debate with Cofnas, plumps for the latter option, but this leads to the obvious response that maybe Jews are just over-represented in political movements generally except those that specifically exclude or repel them in some way, just like they are over-represented in a whole bunch of other stuff. This is the Occam's razor solution to the problem, and KMac's attempts to deflect it just leads to the addition of one epicycle after another.
Several years ago, I asked Kevin about Jewish sociologist Paul Medding's fascinating paper, "Towards a general theory of Jewish political interests and behavior" in which Medding puts forward an ethnic-interest model similar to that of Kmac, except that he focuses on the conditions under which Jews support leftist, centrist, or rightist policies. In reply, Kevin noted that the third book of his CofC trilogy specifically concerned the 20th century USA political landscape and that Jews are flexible strategizes, and so the ideas/policies supported at one time and in one place would be highly contingent, in line with Medding's argument. For this reason, I have to disagree with your statement (b) and the subsequent discussion. The statement would have to be reworded as a historical claim: Jews tended to promote left wing ideas in 20th century American. It has been a while since I corresponded with him, so you might email for clarification. Medding's paper is worth the read.
That's what I already said: when challenged on all the different ways that reality doesn't conform to his theory he adds as many ad hoc additions as the thinks necessary. To take the most absurd example, in his book, Jewish opposition to intermarriage is an integral part of the group evolutionary strategy, but subsequently so is Jewish intermarriage. It's all pretty stupid really. A good example of why people should study history rather than coming up with meta historical theories based on fields in their infancy like evpsych.
The Project Talent sample of people born in 1940 gave a mean of 106.8 with a massive sample size, the SAT mean of Jews is ~108, and the mean of modernish samples is also ~106-108. The average of self-identified religious Jews has stayed roughly stagnant - meaning that controlling for apostasy and admixture should not shift the Jewish average very much.
The issue is that Jewish elites are far to the left of gentile elites. At least back two generations ago gentile elites were close to evenly split while Jewish elites were far left.
Ironically, Jews may have influence gentile elite culture enough to the left that this gap has closed. Elite whites attacking Jews for being white is the latest result.
Interesting article., I've found intelligence research more and more interesting in the past few years. This mostly comes from the perspective of my thesis that it's important to raise the baseline of human intelligence to mitigate some of the existential risks of superintelligent AI. I've really only thought about intelligence differences from the perspective of finding regulators that could be utilized to benefits us all.
Beyond these polygenic score differences, what do you think the actual phenotype is in terms of intelligence differences, e.g., greater number of cortical neurons, interconnectivity, synapse morphological differences?
Greater concentration and also raw number of neurons, primarily driven by pituitary secretion of various growth hormones (mostly HGH). Hence the factors that stimulate growth are what really affects intelligence - earlier puberty, longer elevated HGH secretion (so increased heights and larger size of tissue unaffected by growth plate fusion like ears, nose, palms, cartilage mostly), nutrition (proteins primarily), infections (can disrupt hormones long term), and obviously education, because HGH distribution is primarily through blood and if you don't stimulate brain enough it won't get blood and growth hormone compared to others who do stimulate it.
But basic growth hormone therapies doesn't appear to produce genius level intelligence, so there is a huge potential for either improved growth factor therapy (dosing, timing) or other growth stimulating peptides like neural growth factor in particular.
Thanks for the articles. It's interesting that HGH helps SGA children reach normal height and intelligence. It would be good to understand whether or not this does more than help individuals reach their potential.
As for this explaining a greater trend, this explanation fails to address a couple of points.
1) Humans are born with almost all of their neurons and get very few additional neurons throughout their life through neurogenesis.
2) Average height and IQ are weakly correlated (I believe it's close to 0.2).
3) Average Ashkenazi height is actually well below the mean.
" we might call the anti-Semites (they don't object to this label in my experience), are the ones who notice Jews have a lot of power and use this in ways they don't like."
they don't like the way Jews (or the Jewish State) routinely label anyone who they don't like as "anti-semite"; & do object to this self-serving labeling by Jews & their claque
So what is it about jewish polygenetics? Can we replicate it?
I think it's mostly a function of human growth hormone (HGH). From polygenic studies you will notice that education PGS correlates strongly with height PGS. You can see those same SD deviations to the higher IQ in the higher standing height graphs, like jewish people will be 0.5-1 SD taller than average man. And yes, everyone can replicated that, HGH is a commonly used prescription drug.
The question is what else is there, because while HGH will do the IQ trick, there might be other growth hormone polygenetics involved, like neural growth factor, which i don't think is easily available.
No, i mean, can you just give a specific peptide drug to non-jewish population to achieve exactly the same intellectual capacity. The answer is yes, and it's already underway.
"I think it's mostly a function of human growth hormone (HGH). From polygenic studies you will notice that education PGS correlates strongly with height PGS. You can see those same SD deviations to the higher IQ in the higher standing height graphs, bodybuilders. And yes, everyone can replicated that, HGH is a commonly used prescription drug."
This is the goofiest crap I have seen in quite a while. If your supposition was correct NBA players and bodybuilders would be theoretical physicists. Show a reputable source for '...like jewish people will be 0.5-1 SD taller than average man.'
Polygenetics of height and intelligence are closely linked. There are studies showing children who administered HGH also gained IQ, when compared to their short peers without HGH drug https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16439851/
If a group are higher in a heritable trait. And said trait have a positive assortative mating factor. Can the trait still survive within the group, even though they are breeding outside the group?
So, three variables:
Heritability, assortative mating and breeding with out-group.
"... I had always been well aware of the very heavy Jewish presence at elite academic institutions. But the underwhelming percentage of Jewish students who today achieve high scores on academic aptitude tests was totally unexpected, and very different from the impressions I had formed during my own high school and college years a generation or so ago. An examination of other available statistics seems to support my recollections and provides evidence for a dramatic recent decline in the academic performance of American Jews..... However, if we separate out the Jewish students, their ratio turns out to be 435 percent, while the residual ratio for non-Jewish whites drops to just 28 percent, less than half of even the Asian figure. As a consequence, Asians appear under-represented relative to Jews by a factor of seven, while non-Jewish whites are by far the most under-represented group of all, despite any benefits they might receive from athletic, legacy, or geographical distribution factors. The rest of the Ivy League tends to follow a similar pattern, with the overall Jewish ratio being 381 percent, the Asian figure at 62 percent, and the ratio for non-Jewish whites a low 35 percent, all relative to their number of high-ability college-age students."
Also: From the Occidental Observer and Andrew Joyce, "Modify the Standards of the In-Group"
Is there a difference between american ashkenazi and those from the Pale of Settlement? Selection effects induced by migration explain the difference between India indians and US indians.
Thanks for breaking down the aspects of Jewish intelligence.
In general, when people talk about 'Jewish' intelligence, they lump all Jews together. This, of course, is a big mistake. There is a significant difference between all Jews and Ashkenazi Jews, and the differences are apparent from the IQ data and observation.
Psychometric data of other traits would also be interesting, such as integrity, which does not always accompany intelligence.
So with all of this being said, do you expect an admixture analyis study on Jewish IQ to produce a result above, or below the 110 IQ that Piffer found?
Ashkenazi jews are basically city-living germans (Yiddish is German dialect) with significant middle east admixture. So it will approach that of ethnic-german living in cities IQ, which is around 105-110 https://www.presseportal.de/pm/116734/3410165
The majority of the Ashkenazi population of say, the year 1700, lived in Poland and Russia, and in shtetls, not cities. The westward dispersal into Germany was later, although these eastern Ashkenazim were probably originally derived from a Rhineland population.
Also, very little mixture from eastern europe into jewish genetics, as by the time they got there, population was large enough to follow the golden rule of "marrying jewish men doesn't make you or your children jew". The main european admixture was during early years of Roman (Greek) empire and after its collapse into Holy Roman (think German) Empire.
So if we take IQ 110, as in your fig. 9, and estimate generously that Ashkenazi Jews are 2.5% of the US population, is higher average IQ sufficient to account for overrepresentation (even harder to estimate than IQ, I realise) in higher reaches of the professions? My guess is that the answer is no.
But then of course assiduousness etc. would also have to be accounted for. Even afterwards, I'd say the answer would *still* be no.
Could you do an analysis like this? I would be *very* interested in reading it.
'Personally, I doubt Jewish psychological differences/advantages can wholy explain their achievement, though they almost certainly play a large role in it. Others like Sean Last have documented that social networks may play a role in Jewish achievement, which seems plausible enough to me.'
From what I can see (will read in time) Sean Last indeed suggests nepotism has non-trivial explanatory power:
Something I don't understand. The first thing an antisemite usually does in conversation is refer you to the work of Kevin MacDonald. So I read him and it turns out that not only does he write that Jews do have a high IQ, this is a central part of thesis without which the entire group evolutionary strategy falls apart. And not only that, but he actually overestimates Jewish average IQ as being in the 120s! And not only that, but he extends this - clearly incorrectly - to Jews in general, not just Ashkenazim, and to Jews going back as far as Jews are an identifiable ethnic group.
So why don't antisemites attack KMac as being in the pocket of the Jews and peddling false myths of Jewish supremacy? Is it possible that they are illiterate retards?
I think he was estimating their verbal intelligence, which is higher than their general intelligence (verbal tilt). It's probably not 120 IQ though.
Verbal tilt is a bit of a misnomer. 'Everything except spatial tilt' would be better. My pet theory is that the whole spatial intelligence thing is fake and they just put it in there to level out the playing field for gentiles.
Spatial ability is definitely not fake. You can see various ability scores for Project Talent in https://www.sebjenseb.net/p/jewish-iq-not-a-myth. Memory IQ was 100, spatial IQ was 99. I'm sure if one tested more aspects of intelligence, one would find more differences. Given the math IQ was 109, it is true that verbal tilt is somewhat of a misnomer.
It was a joke, and I think a funny one. And most white adults like this kind of humour which is why people watch Curb Your Enthusiasm and not Kenan and Kel. However, as with all jokes, there is an element of truth. If someone is really good at verbal reasoning and rubbish at everything else most people would say he is 'smart but dysfunctional'; if someone is good at maths but bad at everything else they would say the same. If someone has a good memory but is bad at everything else they say 'he has a good memory, but he's dumb'. If he has good spatial ability and he is bad at everything else, they say 'Jonny sure is good at packing them boxes'.
Thus common sense concurs with Kevin MacDonald. When we talk about intelligence as an actual causal factors in human affairs and not some dork academic construct, we basically mean verbal and mathematics.
Let me put it another way. In general, spatial ability and memory correlate well with mathematic and verbal reasoning. It therefore makes sense to put spatial and memory questions on IQ tests especially since they are less culturally loaded. However, if you come across an individual with a strong verbal/mathematical tilt it makes more sense to ignore the memory and spatial scores and just give him the maths/verbal score because this is what intelligence means in the real world. The same goes for someone who has a really strong memory/spatial tilt; you should give him the verbal/mathematical score. If you argue otherwise you are basically halfway to believing in multiple intelligences and saying joggers are just as smart as whites because they are better at basketball.
No, to argue otherwise is to accept general intelligence, the g factor. As far as I know, there is no MGCFA study of Jewish vs. gentile European intelligence, so we don't know the relative advantages on g. As you say, it appears Jews are high on crystalized (accumulated knowledge) ability, less so on fluid (spatial or memory). I would be interested in seeing processing speed, reaction time data, but as you know, it is very difficult to sample Jews for the purpose of giving them some specialized test.
Higher prevalence of mental illness among Jews being demonstrated in real time.
Yeah, just as they are trying to level the playing field for men compared to women right? I think it's pretty clear that you are extremely bothered by the "anti-Semites" to a point where you come up with your own low IQ conspiracy theories.
You want to know what's funny? It's not actually my pet theory at all. It's a joke I made up while writing the comment, and then I thought about it and there's actually a pretty solid theory behind it. That's what it is to be Jewish, and it's why we are number 1 and you are not.
You are not number one, that’s funny. I would vote on you being narcissistic though.
It's interesting that they're so often arrogant but really just moreso self-centered. Like they don't have an off switch that even I as an autistic recognize is there. Like even when they're trying to be humble, it comes off more as 'you don't get me' *sob* A sort of far more often feminine affect, likely from larger right-side brains.
similar to autistics, but differently they seem to lack social intuition. I would wonder if it's thousands of years of cultural preferential social exclusion.
"It was just a joke"..."Well actually there is a solid theory behind it"
There is no solid theory behind it. If you look at the results Emil linked to, removing spatial IQ from the equation wouldn't change the White-Jewish IQ desparity by any significant amount.
"What it means to be Jewish is to make up a stupid theory out of spite". If you insist...
Spatial ability is where whites get absolutely hammered by Asians.
Either there's a tilt or not. If Jews do better on maths and verbal intelligence and worse on memory and spatial ability, this just means that their IQ results underestimate their actual intelligence as the word is normally understood. This is what Kevin MacDonald thinks and I agree. If only KMac had some intelligent antisemites to keep him company, he probably wouldn't be so cranky all the time. Do better!
Here we go...
Well history shows clearly the asymmetry in the achievements of the" Jewish "people who lived in European Christian heritage countries and those that went into the Ottoman Empire and East Africa.
I'm not really sure what you are responding to, but these groups of "Jewish" people haven't achieved much because they aren't very smart. If it wasn't for Ashkenazi Jews, Jews would be just another weird Middle Eastern minority like Druze or Yazidis.
Precisely. But all of those (in your own words)not very smart" Jewish" people as well as the Ashkenazim are eligible for automatic citizenship of Israel based on the premise that they had a shared ancestry in the Middle East 2 millennia ago. The nature /nurture dynamic should be a given to explain their divergent paths.
I think it is.
Jews favor their own group, like all other normal humans — whites are unusual, arguably pathologically so, by making it a thing to promote members of outgroups and disfavor their own group. That by itself would account for Jews doing disproportionately well in white countries. Imagine playing a game that you’re already good at, AND your opponent cheats to help you win.
White nationalists are usually lower-IQ whites, but which favor their own group, which makes them absolve white liberals and basically sound like blacks who blame whites for everything.
What makes you state "White nationalists are usually lower-IQ Whites"?
Stereotypes are true.
The healthy jews isolate.
Nigga they're fucking retarded
That's quite a generalization.
In arguments, both philo- and anti-semites -- whether out of ignorance or mauvaise foi -- routinely conflate distinct issues: (1) the reason for Jewish overrepresentation in various fields (e.g., IQ vs. ethnic nepotism) and (2) the effect of Jewish ethnic identity on Jewish political behavior. At times, Cofnas has also critiqued Kmac's argument regarding (2) by arguing contra (1) -- a patently absurd line of reasoning. This would be equivalent to arguing that because South African Whites were more intelligent than Blacks, the political project of Apartheid South Africa was unrelated to White ethnic self-interest. I agree it is odd, though.
Cofnas' argument is that you don't need a special theory for why Jews are overrepresented in Left Wing political movements if they are also over-represented in a whole bunch of other things, you need a general theory. This is often misrepresented as him saying it's just about IQ, even though he said repreatedly that this wasn't the case.
The distinction you are making is correct, and it would be better if more people made it, but the fact is that KMac's theory itself collapses the distinction.
Kmac's argues: (1a) Jewish ethnocentrism shapes Jewish political behavioral, (1b) conditions a high degree of ethnic cohesion, (1c) and also inclines Jews towards ethnic nepotism; Jewish overrepresentation in certain societally influential positions results from both (2a) Jewish skill and (2b) ethnic nepotism; (3) Jews are able to realize their political interest -- to shape social norms and policies in line with ethnic interest -- due to a combination of their skill, cohesion, and social position. From this perspective, which primarily concerns (1a), the specific degree to which overrepresentation in various fields is due to skill vs. nepotism (2a-b) is unimportant. Would you disagree with this summary?
I think that's a fair summary, but it needs to be added that KMac's theory is not that Jews ascend to positions of power and *then* use that power to advance their ethnic interests it's that (a) they specifically seek out those positions of power to advance those ethnic interests and (b) they specifically promote left wing ideas and not just random ideas that promote their ethnic interest.
Now, (b) is where it gets slippy. The strong reading of KMac's thesis, and the one that he pretty clearly endorses in the trilogy is that leftism itself is an epiphenomena of Jewish evolutionary strategy in a white gentile society. This is open to fairly obvious objections, like massive Jewish over-representation in Italian fascism or American libertarianism to take only the most well documented examples. There are 2 basic strategies that KMac can use here. One is to basically say these are just random noise and aren't important; the second is to say these things are also part of the group evolutionary strategy. He mostly, especially in the debate with Cofnas, plumps for the latter option, but this leads to the obvious response that maybe Jews are just over-represented in political movements generally except those that specifically exclude or repel them in some way, just like they are over-represented in a whole bunch of other stuff. This is the Occam's razor solution to the problem, and KMac's attempts to deflect it just leads to the addition of one epicycle after another.
Several years ago, I asked Kevin about Jewish sociologist Paul Medding's fascinating paper, "Towards a general theory of Jewish political interests and behavior" in which Medding puts forward an ethnic-interest model similar to that of Kmac, except that he focuses on the conditions under which Jews support leftist, centrist, or rightist policies. In reply, Kevin noted that the third book of his CofC trilogy specifically concerned the 20th century USA political landscape and that Jews are flexible strategizes, and so the ideas/policies supported at one time and in one place would be highly contingent, in line with Medding's argument. For this reason, I have to disagree with your statement (b) and the subsequent discussion. The statement would have to be reworded as a historical claim: Jews tended to promote left wing ideas in 20th century American. It has been a while since I corresponded with him, so you might email for clarification. Medding's paper is worth the read.
That's what I already said: when challenged on all the different ways that reality doesn't conform to his theory he adds as many ad hoc additions as the thinks necessary. To take the most absurd example, in his book, Jewish opposition to intermarriage is an integral part of the group evolutionary strategy, but subsequently so is Jewish intermarriage. It's all pretty stupid really. A good example of why people should study history rather than coming up with meta historical theories based on fields in their infancy like evpsych.
The Project Talent sample of people born in 1940 gave a mean of 106.8 with a massive sample size, the SAT mean of Jews is ~108, and the mean of modernish samples is also ~106-108. The average of self-identified religious Jews has stayed roughly stagnant - meaning that controlling for apostasy and admixture should not shift the Jewish average very much.
The issue is that Jewish elites are far to the left of gentile elites. At least back two generations ago gentile elites were close to evenly split while Jewish elites were far left.
Ironically, Jews may have influence gentile elite culture enough to the left that this gap has closed. Elite whites attacking Jews for being white is the latest result.
Another issue the logic of leftism itself, which attacks anyone who's successful.
Interesting article., I've found intelligence research more and more interesting in the past few years. This mostly comes from the perspective of my thesis that it's important to raise the baseline of human intelligence to mitigate some of the existential risks of superintelligent AI. I've really only thought about intelligence differences from the perspective of finding regulators that could be utilized to benefits us all.
Beyond these polygenic score differences, what do you think the actual phenotype is in terms of intelligence differences, e.g., greater number of cortical neurons, interconnectivity, synapse morphological differences?
Greater concentration and also raw number of neurons, primarily driven by pituitary secretion of various growth hormones (mostly HGH). Hence the factors that stimulate growth are what really affects intelligence - earlier puberty, longer elevated HGH secretion (so increased heights and larger size of tissue unaffected by growth plate fusion like ears, nose, palms, cartilage mostly), nutrition (proteins primarily), infections (can disrupt hormones long term), and obviously education, because HGH distribution is primarily through blood and if you don't stimulate brain enough it won't get blood and growth hormone compared to others who do stimulate it.
There are studies showing HGH increasing intelligence as much as height for normal children (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16439851/), Downs (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1651-2227.2009.01679.x).
But basic growth hormone therapies doesn't appear to produce genius level intelligence, so there is a huge potential for either improved growth factor therapy (dosing, timing) or other growth stimulating peptides like neural growth factor in particular.
Thanks for the articles. It's interesting that HGH helps SGA children reach normal height and intelligence. It would be good to understand whether or not this does more than help individuals reach their potential.
As for this explaining a greater trend, this explanation fails to address a couple of points.
1) Humans are born with almost all of their neurons and get very few additional neurons throughout their life through neurogenesis.
2) Average height and IQ are weakly correlated (I believe it's close to 0.2).
3) Average Ashkenazi height is actually well below the mean.
" we might call the anti-Semites (they don't object to this label in my experience), are the ones who notice Jews have a lot of power and use this in ways they don't like."
they don't like the way Jews (or the Jewish State) routinely label anyone who they don't like as "anti-semite"; & do object to this self-serving labeling by Jews & their claque
So what is it about jewish polygenetics? Can we replicate it?
I think it's mostly a function of human growth hormone (HGH). From polygenic studies you will notice that education PGS correlates strongly with height PGS. You can see those same SD deviations to the higher IQ in the higher standing height graphs, like jewish people will be 0.5-1 SD taller than average man. And yes, everyone can replicated that, HGH is a commonly used prescription drug.
The question is what else is there, because while HGH will do the IQ trick, there might be other growth hormone polygenetics involved, like neural growth factor, which i don't think is easily available.
It has been replicated 3 times already.
No, i mean, can you just give a specific peptide drug to non-jewish population to achieve exactly the same intellectual capacity. The answer is yes, and it's already underway.
"I think it's mostly a function of human growth hormone (HGH). From polygenic studies you will notice that education PGS correlates strongly with height PGS. You can see those same SD deviations to the higher IQ in the higher standing height graphs, bodybuilders. And yes, everyone can replicated that, HGH is a commonly used prescription drug."
This is the goofiest crap I have seen in quite a while. If your supposition was correct NBA players and bodybuilders would be theoretical physicists. Show a reputable source for '...like jewish people will be 0.5-1 SD taller than average man.'
Famously, Einstein towered over his colleagues like a a modern day Goliath.
Einstein was 1879 birth cohort, which averaged at 164-167, while Einstein was 171.5, meaning he was at least a SD above mean of his cohort in Germany (Fig 8.2 https://www.nber.org/system/files/chapters/c7434/c7434.pdf)
"Famously, Einstein towered over his colleagues like a a modern day Goliath."
Where do you get this crap? Einstein was reported to be 5"7'
At least Neverminder knows what a joke looks like.
Why would an intelligent person visit a serious blog to tell jokes?
Answer: They wouldn't.
Polygenetics of height and intelligence are closely linked. There are studies showing children who administered HGH also gained IQ, when compared to their short peers without HGH drug https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16439851/
If a group are higher in a heritable trait. And said trait have a positive assortative mating factor. Can the trait still survive within the group, even though they are breeding outside the group?
So, three variables:
Heritability, assortative mating and breeding with out-group.
The amount of intense thought so many people are committing themselves to about Jews is a little bit shocking to me.
For those who would like to read more on this topic, may I recommend a couple of articles?
The first comes to us from Rob Unz, a Jewish publisher of the Unz Review:
"American Meritocracy Revisited" - https://www.unz.com/runz/american-meritocracy-revisited/
"... I had always been well aware of the very heavy Jewish presence at elite academic institutions. But the underwhelming percentage of Jewish students who today achieve high scores on academic aptitude tests was totally unexpected, and very different from the impressions I had formed during my own high school and college years a generation or so ago. An examination of other available statistics seems to support my recollections and provides evidence for a dramatic recent decline in the academic performance of American Jews..... However, if we separate out the Jewish students, their ratio turns out to be 435 percent, while the residual ratio for non-Jewish whites drops to just 28 percent, less than half of even the Asian figure. As a consequence, Asians appear under-represented relative to Jews by a factor of seven, while non-Jewish whites are by far the most under-represented group of all, despite any benefits they might receive from athletic, legacy, or geographical distribution factors. The rest of the Ivy League tends to follow a similar pattern, with the overall Jewish ratio being 381 percent, the Asian figure at 62 percent, and the ratio for non-Jewish whites a low 35 percent, all relative to their number of high-ability college-age students."
Also: From the Occidental Observer and Andrew Joyce, "Modify the Standards of the In-Group"
https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2020/01/14/modify-the-standards-of-the-in-group-on-jews-and-mass-communications-part-one-of-two/
“To be successful, mass propaganda on the behalf of out-groups would have to modify the standards of the in-group."
Samuel H. Flowerman, Mass Propaganda in the War Against Bigotry, 1947.
"The first comes to us from Rob Unz, a Jewish publisher of the Unz Review:"
His name is Ron Unz
do you have a list of global iq?
Moshagen, Hilbig, and Zettler are providing the analytical tools to explain the "success" of the Ashkenazim. https://www.darkfactor.org/
When polygenic scores for D-factors are obtained, science will be getting serious about the reasons for Jewish "success."
Imagine thinking that winning nobel prizes in chemistry was indicative of being evil. What a world that must be to live in.
Imagine thinking that the only activity done was winning Nobel Prizes. Your argument could not be weaker.
Is there a difference between american ashkenazi and those from the Pale of Settlement? Selection effects induced by migration explain the difference between India indians and US indians.
After reading the comments, I find it interesting that so many stupid people comment on an article about intelligence.
Argument status: not found
Then it's just as well you're here to represent the midwit community
It attracts people for whom intelligence means the most - both extremes
Thanks for breaking down the aspects of Jewish intelligence.
In general, when people talk about 'Jewish' intelligence, they lump all Jews together. This, of course, is a big mistake. There is a significant difference between all Jews and Ashkenazi Jews, and the differences are apparent from the IQ data and observation.
Psychometric data of other traits would also be interesting, such as integrity, which does not always accompany intelligence.
So with all of this being said, do you expect an admixture analyis study on Jewish IQ to produce a result above, or below the 110 IQ that Piffer found?
Ashkenazi jews are basically city-living germans (Yiddish is German dialect) with significant middle east admixture. So it will approach that of ethnic-german living in cities IQ, which is around 105-110 https://www.presseportal.de/pm/116734/3410165
The majority of the Ashkenazi population of say, the year 1700, lived in Poland and Russia, and in shtetls, not cities. The westward dispersal into Germany was later, although these eastern Ashkenazim were probably originally derived from a Rhineland population.
they lived in Poland but spoke german
Also, very little mixture from eastern europe into jewish genetics, as by the time they got there, population was large enough to follow the golden rule of "marrying jewish men doesn't make you or your children jew". The main european admixture was during early years of Roman (Greek) empire and after its collapse into Holy Roman (think German) Empire.
Alright seems about fair
So if we take IQ 110, as in your fig. 9, and estimate generously that Ashkenazi Jews are 2.5% of the US population, is higher average IQ sufficient to account for overrepresentation (even harder to estimate than IQ, I realise) in higher reaches of the professions? My guess is that the answer is no.
But then of course assiduousness etc. would also have to be accounted for. Even afterwards, I'd say the answer would *still* be no.
Could you do an analysis like this? I would be *very* interested in reading it.
Seb Jensen did this already in the linked post, but a few others have also tried it.
https://www.sebjenseb.net/p/jewish-iq-not-a-myth
So we looked at the data...
'Personally, I doubt Jewish psychological differences/advantages can wholy explain their achievement, though they almost certainly play a large role in it. Others like Sean Last have documented that social networks may play a role in Jewish achievement, which seems plausible enough to me.'
From what I can see (will read in time) Sean Last indeed suggests nepotism has non-trivial explanatory power:
https://ideasanddata.wordpress.com/2020/05/17/jewish-influence-on-american-politics/
It's a category error to look at intelligence and nepotism as alternative explanations. If you are more intelligent, you can do better at nepotism.
Hey bro cool it with the anti-semitism bro
"Cool it with the anti-semitic remarks" is the phrase you are looking for.
Were you popular at school?
Thanx