Race 'Science'

[dann]

What IQ doesn't tell you about race

 

[CFLarsen]

bpesta,

I take it you have read the New Yorker article, and/or are familiar with Flynn's research.

Since IQ (not g, but IQ) is increasing (you have admitted this yourself) over the years, doesn't this mean that if we go far enough back in time, we start with the whole population having an IQ of close to 0?

 

[dann]

... we start with the whole population having an IQ of close to 0?

I think that it is safe to make that particular assumption, Claus!

 

[Kotatsu]

Right, so you don't accept the currenty taxonomy of Homo sapiens sapiens like the rest of the modern world. Good to know you've come up with your own classification scheme. I'm sure it's not at all racist.

DanishDynamite's classification scheme is the only one that is valid at the moment. Under the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature, all subdivisions of organisms beneath the species rank are treated as subspecies for all practical purposes (e.g. for purposes of priority), regardless of what the original author called them (race, variety, form, subspecies, kleinart, and so on). As this is the only operating code of classification that is widely used for animals (1), DD is, from a taxonomic point of view, absolutely correct.

Equating race with subspecies ha nothing to do with racism. Maintaining that the various described subspecies --- with the exception of Neanderthals and so on, if they are truly subspecies --- are not synonymous, however, could be, but that is not necessarily true either.

I realise that there is a difference here in how "race" is used socially and politically, and how it is used in science, but as you mentioned "taxonomy", the social part is inapplicable.

---
(1) Note that the PhyloCode apparently isn't valid until the book Phylonym is published, which hasn't happened yet.

 

[CFLarsen]

I think that it is safe to make that particular assumption, Claus!

Har-de-har....

My point is that we don't have to go that far back

How would Aristotle have scored on such an IQ test? Probably lower than 0, hm?

 

[bpesta22]

bpesta,

I take it you have read the New Yorker article, and/or are familiar with Flynn's research.

Since IQ (not g, but IQ) is increasing (you have admitted this yourself) over the years, doesn't this mean that if we go far enough back in time, we start with the whole population having an IQ of close to 0?

Yes, indeed, aristotle was -0. And the ancient greek olympiads took weeks to run the marathon:

Surely this invalidates time pieces as an accurate measure of running speed.

 

[ErkDemon]

How is race not the same as sub-species?

Historical usage and context, and associated philosophy.

"sub-species" is a biological term, "race" is a political concept.