Working in English

[llewellyn]

Fair call...but I am talking about Asians in the Uk.

As you say, Asian is a diverse term. In the US it refers to East Asians (what we might call Orientals), but in the UK it refers to people from the Indian subcontinent. Of course people from the whole of Asia are Asians, but in political discourse the term Asian is used to mean Pakistani, Indian and Bangladeshi. And yes, those groups don't like being lumped together!!

Chinese - high IQ, high achieving at school, little really heard about them, rarely claim discrimination, just get on with their lives
Indian - some high IQ castes (IQ of people leaving India is higher than the national Indian average), but also fully engaged with multiculturalism in the UK. Lots of doctors and dentists. Frequent press reports of sexual molestation of patients by Indian doctors.
Pakistani - low IQ, low achievers. Second and third generation increasingly alienated, encouraged by multiculturalists to believe they have a valid grudge, 5% support for al-Qaida, with 50% telling pollsters they are "somewhat sympathetic". The community is increasingly prominent in rape and child abuse statistics.
Bangladeshi - even lower IQ. Most without jobs.

I believe that there are legitimate arguments against connecting IQ levels very directly with nations and, hmm, "races". The connection between social success and IQ is often very circular and used very crudely to justify present conditions and statuses whether fair or unfair (I have no doubt that nobility would have scored higher than peasants during feudal times) - and it also seems that eliminating environmental factors is not very easy or uncomplicated. (For example poor nutrition in childhood is among the factors that directly affect brain capacity.) So I wouldn't really go bell curve about these issues - I don't really know if you do, but the text quoted above seems maybe bit too straightforward.

[llewellyn]

That is just political correctness. Full marks for PC. Zero marks for logic and science. Our understanding of Mendeleevian genetics and heredity tells us that intelligence is ultimately a biological thing, related to the evolution of brain cells..

Well, well, we have had then amazingly rapid genetical progress during the last century - if I remember correctly the averages are 15-20 points higher now. The same can be quite strangely observed if you compare separated twins: the one in well educated, affluent family will score higher than the one in poor, non-educated family. Go figure that sort of heredity... Actually, what science tells us these days is that genetics and environment interact in a very, very, very complex process so that it becomes in many cases virtually impossible to separate them. But, yes, you will have cranks that have learned a little bit of popular science that will think otherwise. I believe the prime minister's father is among this tinfoil crowd... As said, a little knowlege can be a dangerous thing.

[llewellyn]

The evidence from twin studies is that intelligence and tendencies towards violence ARE inherited. An academic summary can be found at http://www.ssc.uwo.ca/psychology/facult ... 20PRSL.pdf

Actually, this below would be a fair summary of the situation. The fact that environment is obviously very critical factor came up already in your "rebuttal", strangely you don't seem to notice that there goes the "ARE inherited" statement that you seem to throw around without any qualifications. Anyway, apart from genetics itself which has proven to be hugely complex area where nature and nurture are highly intertwined, you can easily see the arbitrary nature of the concept itself: "intelligence" as defined as IQ measures, by strange coincidence, thinking necessary for negotiating your cognitive way in an industrial society - that's what we have chosen to call intelligence. We could have other criteria just as well: we could call "wisdom" (as opposed to mere "cleverness") a trait that gets people forming sustainable societies (I guess Australian aborigines would come high there) or ones that don't make nuclear and biological weapons capable of destroying the world many times over. Or we could see that the mere capability of making logical and formal connections does not help your success in complex social situations. So, the term "intelligence" this way defined is comes very loaded with, yes, cultural and ideological presuppositions.

http://www.scq.ubc.ca/the-genetic-basis ... elligence/

[llewellyn]

This is irrelevant to anything. The original discussion was whether someone from abroad should force Finland to adapt to him.

I think your rambling reply already betrayed that the point was quite relevant indeed. Anyway, even your (and Charles Murray's) incorrect, huge simplifications would not matter so much if we would just call IQ for example "superficial mathematical-logical cleverness" quotient... Hymiö. Well, in all seriousness it would be better and less confusing to use a more neutral and more descriptive term.

[Rosamunda]

At least IQ tests correspond to the skills needed in WEstern societies.

...like being able to assemble flat-pack furniture?

I don't get how IQ tests correspond to the skills needed in Western societies. Skills for what?

IMVHO, I think an ability to communicate and socialise are probably amongst the most important skills in western societies. I don't see how finding the right shape lots of times, very quickly actually reveals a person's ability to communicate effectively.

[Pursuivant]

I lived in China for four years, and I can tell you most Chinese just think whatever the government tells them to.

No wonder they do so well in Finland.

[Pursuivant]

The original discussion was whether someone from abroad should force Finland to adapt to him.

They can always try... theres Finnish self-hating xenophiles out there to help them victimize themselves, not as bad as UK or Germany, but hey - its a sign we've come out of the trees and become a western society innit

[Rob A.]

Skills tested for in IQ tests are not the totality of the abilities that have ever been needed by humankind, but few people with low IQ levels would be good managers.

But, then, I've thought for a long time that it is prima facie proof of having a low IQ to actually become a "manager"... The smartest people in any company I've ever worked for always seem to be the "specialists", often people with rather poor management skills.... but I'm sure there are exceptions.... Maybe you're one...

I always seem to be able to do well on IQ tests...GMAT, etc...yet I think I've done some pretty stupid things in my life.... I think you are probably "somewhat right" in what you are saying, but I think IQ tests probably are good in selecting the people at the extremes...high or low, but for the mass of people in the middle they proabably aren't all that great.... What if you were tired the day you took the test??...or had a cold??.... on medication??...suicidal?? ...all sorts of other things. And what if you are from a culture that doesn't "appreciate" the Western value of speed?? You may only complete half the test in the time allocated.... Does that mean, ipso facto, you have "low intelligence'?....

Anyway...it's kind of fun reading the different responses...

[Tiwaz]

I don't get how IQ tests correspond to the skills needed in Western societies. Skills for what?

IMVHO, I think an ability to communicate and socialise are probably amongst the most important skills in western societies. I don't see how finding the right shape lots of times, very quickly actually reveals a person's ability to communicate effectively.

It is called logic. It is VERY necessary in Western society. Communication and socializing are all good and dandy in a party, but they do not create progress. There are lots of cultures which pay plenty of attention to social trappings and activities.

But those rarely go very high in terms of being top notch in progress, at least technologically. You need logical thinking for that.

Communication and socializing will not fix your car when it is broken, ultimately logical deduction of issue is what enables someone to find and fix the issue.

You may communicate the issue to guy fixing it, but it is his/her logical deduction which ultimately leads to success.

[Rosamunda]

IOW you are saying there isn't much room for creativity in Western society, then. Shame.

Some people prefer "to think outside the box" rather than arrange boxes in logical sequence. I think modern western society needs a mix of both.

[TERI]

You got 19 questions right out of a possible 30. You took 16 minutes to complete the test.

You lost some points because you took longer than 15 minutes.

We estimate your IQ to be: 112

The average person has an IQ of 100 - if you are over 100 then you are above average.

yeeehaaaa... and I´m 178cm tall. According to some posts I`m a good example of the "Western society". But then again - I´m bad at socialising and I hate happy people

[Tiwaz]

IOW you are saying there isn't much room for creativity in Western society, then. Shame.

Some people prefer "to think outside the box" rather than arrange boxes in logical sequence. I think modern western society needs a mix of both.

And what do we get when we use creativity without logic to overrule it?

We get horrible, but very artistic, items which have no usefulness.

Like multitude of designer junk we get today. It looks very artsy and creative, and is a pain to sit in/pour water out of/do anything useful with.

So what is value of that crap? It has no real value, because it is only able to act as space filler. Same purpose could be filled by item which is logically designed and would, besides filling room, serve actual practical purpose as well.

"Artistic" or "creative" are not synonymous to good like far too many people like you Penelope appear to think.

[Bubba Elvis XIV]

Stunned....

[Tiwaz]

My post should not be taken as statement that artistic value is irrelevant, far from it.

I have been several times pleasantly surprised when I have noticed that several items with artistic or creative values are actually very comfortable as well to use.

But in those cases, I doubt that designer has just gone with thought of being creative alone, but tempered the process by using logical thinking to achieve item which pleases the eye but is above all else comfortable to use.

I for one rather use something which is goddamn ugly but works well than go for shiny looking but horrible to use item. And second category is far too common in modern world in items you use every day.

But look beneath the surface of your mobile phone for one. It might be flashy looking on the outside, but inside which actually provides the functionality for it is always meticulously logically created. No artistic twirls and swirls.

And it is this functionality which drives our societies forward. And functionality is achieved more through logic than creativity. Because even creativity must be logical to produce something functional. Creativity without logic ends up with items which have no practical value.

[Bubba Elvis XIV]

Ah ok...I was thinking you wanted to abolish all forms of art for a moment

Phones...technology is different though as there are certain rules that need to be adhered to or the technology won't work. Lets be honest, stylistically there's little you can do with a phone with out making is difficult to use.

I for one rather use something which is goddamn ugly but works well than go for shiny looking but horrible to use item. And second category is far too common in modern world in items you use every day.

Quite agree. but the world is obsessed with image and status.
The truth at the end of the day...the best option is to have both. something that works but looks sweeeeeeet.