March 22, 2006
Winters Are Good For Your Genes:
Lynn Book Finds World Average IQ 90, Declining From
North To South
By
Professor J. Philippe Rushton
Four years ago,
via
VDARE.com, I was able to give the
first significant publicity to
IQ and the Wealth of Nations, the luminous book
on IQ and the diverging economic performance of
different countries co-authored by
Richard Lynn with
Tatu Vanhanen. Now Professor Lynn has
followed up with another important book,
Race Differences in Intelligence: An Evolutionary
Analysis.
Its central
finding: the world average IQ is no more than 90,
equivalent to the mental age of a white 14-year-old.
(Standardized IQ tests are normed to 100, the mental age
of the average white 16-year-old.) Lynn also draws
attention to the fact that a north-south IQ continuum
has evolved, apparently through selection for survival
in cold winters. (See the
New
IQ Map of the World.)
These findings
in Lynn’s latest book have profound geopolitical
significance. They imply it may simply not be possible
to transmit Western-style democratic and economic
systems to the populations of
Latin America and Moslem
North Africa and the
Middle East, let alone
sub-Saharan Africa. They mean that the world’s
long-term problems will stem from its populations'
capabilities—much deeper and more intractable than any
"Clash of Civilizations"-style competition
between different political concepts.
The implications
for immigration are obvious: it can have fundamental,
and permanent, consequences.
For Lynn,
Race Differences In Intelligence represents the
culmination of more than a quarter of a century’s work
on intelligence. It was in 1977 that he first ventured
into this field—some would say minefield—with the
publication of two papers on IQ in Japan and Singapore.
Both showed that the East Asians obtained higher
averages than White Europeans in the United States and
Britain. These initial studies were disputed, but the
present book lists 60 studies of the IQs of indigenous
East Asians, all of which confirm the original
contention. IQ and the Wealth of Nations
showed that variation in IQ largely
explains the problem of why some countries are rich
and
others poor. More recently, Lynn has
helped overturn the century-long consensus that
there is no average sex difference in intelligence by
showing that men average 4 to 5 IQ points higher than
women. (E.g. Lynn &
Irwing, 2004, "Sex Differences on the Progressive
Matrices: a meta-analysis," Intelligence,
32, 481-498. [pay
archive] This finding is controversial even by the
standards of the IQ debate—I hope to write about it soon
in VDARE.COM.)
Most studies of
race differences in intelligence have been local in
focus. In the United States they have been largely
concerned with the IQs of Whites, Blacks, Hispanics,
East Asians and Native American Indians. In Australia
they have been concerned with the low IQ of the
Aborigines, and in New Zealand with the low IQ of the
Maoris. Although a few theorists have taken a global
perspective and posited genetic and evolutionary
explanations for the three macro-races of East Asians,
Europeans and Africans, most have typically explained
the local differences by environmental and cultural
factors such as poverty and racism.
Lynn’s book
extends the global perspective well beyond the
three-macro races. He reviews more than 500 published IQ
studies worldwide from the beginning of the twentieth
century up to the present, devoting a chapter to each of
the ten "genetic clusters," or population groups,
as identified by
Luigi Cavalli-Sforza and his colleagues in their
mammoth 1994 book,
The History and Geography of Human Genes.
Lynn regards
these genetic clusters as "races." He concludes
that the East Asians—Chinese,
Japanese and Koreans—have the highest mean IQ at
105. Europeans follow with an IQ of 100. Some ways below
these are the
Inuit or Eskimos (IQ 91), South East Asians (IQ 87),
Native American Indians (IQ 87), Pacific Islanders (IQ
85), South Asians and North Africans (IQ 84). Well below
these come the sub-Saharan Africans (IQ 67) followed by
the Australian Aborigines (IQ 62).
The lowest
scoring are the Bushmen of the Kalahari Desert together
with the Pygmies of the Congo rain forests (IQ 54).
After the ten
chapters setting out the evidence for the average IQ of
each of these ten races, there follows a chapter on the
reliability and validity of the measures. These show
that, although additional evidence may be required to
confirm some of the racial IQ estimates, many have very
high reliability in the sense that different studies
give closely similar results. For instance, East Asians
invariably obtain high IQs, not only in their own
native homelands but also in
Singapore, Malaysia,
Hawaii, and
North America.
To establish the
validity of the racial IQs, Lynn shows that they
correlate highly with performance in international
studies of achievement in mathematics and science. And
racial IQs also correlate with national economic
development. This means they can help to explain why
some countries are rich and others poor.
Lynn suggests
further that IQ differences explain how quickly
populations made the Neolithic transition from
hunter-gatherer to settled agriculture, to building
early city states, and later the development of
mature civilizations.
Lynn concludes
that the causes of race differences in intelligence are
50 percent genetic and 50 percent environmental. This
estimate is in line with those of other recent reviews.
(Arthur
Jensen and I also took it as our starting point in
our 2005
survey [pdf]
of IQ and race difference literature published in
Psychology, Public Policy, and Law.) Lynn argues
that the consistency of the racial IQs in so many
different places differing widely in circumstance can
only be explained by powerful genetic factors.
Lynn also
applies a general principle from evolutionary biology to
previous analyses that found a substantial genetic
contribution to the differences in intelligence between
East Asians, Whites, and Blacks. He argues that wherever
subspecies adapt to novel environments, they invariably
develop differences in all characteristics for
which there is genetic variation—such as skin colour,
hair texture, musculo-skeletal traits and susceptibility
and resistance to various diseases. Lynn asserts that
intelligence cannot be an exception.
Lynn works out
the genetic contribution in most detail for
people of African descent. He argues that Blacks in
the United States appear to have experienced broadly the
same environment as Whites in regard to the
environmental determinants of intelligence, such as
nutrition, because Blacks and Whites have had the same
average height since World War I. He presents evidence
that Blacks in the southern states have very little
White ancestry and have an average IQ of about 80, and
he proposes this be adopted as the genotypic IQ of
Africans. Consequently, because the average IQ for
Blacks in sub-Saharan Africa is about 67, he takes this
13-point difference as the amount due to the
adverse environmental conditions, principally
poor nutrition, and
health, found on that continent.
Lynn's last
three chapters are concerned with the book’s subtitle—An
Evolutionary Analysis. They discuss how
race differences in intelligence have evolved.
Lynn begins by
putting the problem in context by summarizing
Harry Jerison’s (1973) classic study,
The Evolution of the Brain and Intelligence.
This showed that during the course of evolution, species
have evolved greater intelligence in order to survive in
more cognitively demanding environments. The same
principle, Lynn argues, explains the evolution of race
differences in human intelligence.
As early humans
migrated out of Africa they encountered the cognitively
demanding problem of having to survive cold winters
where there were no plant foods and they had to hunt,
sometimes big game. They also had to solve the problem
of keeping warm. This required greater intelligence than
was needed in
tropical and semi-tropical equatorial Africa where
plant foods are plentiful throughout the year. Lynn
shows that race differences in brain size and
intelligence are both closely associated with low winter
temperatures in the regions they inhabit. He gives a
figure of 1,282 cc for the average brain size of
sub-Saharan Africans, as compared with 1,367 cc for
Europeans and 1,416 cc for East Asians.
Since I have
argued many of the same positions as Lynn in my book
Race, Evolution, and Behavior, I will add that
Lynn’s brain size data are backed by a great deal of
independent, converging evidence, including that from
brain weights at autopsy, endocranial volume, and
external head size measures. (My book provides many
details of individual studies.) Moreover, magnetic
resonance imaging studies make clear that the relation
between brain size and intelligence is highly reliable.
Lynn is on very safe ground in his statements here.
From time to
time Lynn notes anomalies in his theory that require
explanations. One of these is that Europeans made most
of the great intellectual discoveries, while the East
Asians, despite having a higher IQ, made relatively
few—a paradox extensively documented by Charles Murray
in his 2003 book,
Human Accomplishment. Lynn proposes an
explanation for this: it may be that East Asians are
more conformist than Europeans and this inhibits
creative achievement. (In Race, Evolution, and
Behavior, I presented evidence that this personality
trait has genetic roots.)
Another anomaly:
the average IQ of Israel is only about 95—substantially
higher than the median IQ of 85 found elsewhere in the
region, but much lower than the
average IQ of Jews outside of Israel, estimated at
between 108 and 115.
Lynn breaks the
Israeli IQ into three components: 40 percent Ashkenazim
(European Jewish) with a mean IQ of 103; 40 percent
Sephardim (Oriental Jewish) with a mean IQ of 91; and 20
percent Arab with a mean IQ of 86, which is virtually
the same as that of Arabs elsewhere. Lynn suggests these
differences could have arisen from selective migration
(more intelligent Jews emigrated to Britain and the
USA), intermarriage with different IQ populations (those
in Europe versus those in North Africa), selective
survival through persecution (European Jews were the
most persecuted), and the inclusion of ethnic non-Jews
among the
Ashkenazim in Israel as a result of the immigration
of people from the
former Soviet Bloc countries who posed as Jews.
Lynn also notes
some anomalies in the cold winter theory of
intelligence. The most striking: the Inuit, exposed to
the coldest winter temperatures, have a brain size equal
to East Asians, and yet have an average IQ of only 91.
To explain this anomaly, Lynn proposes that additional
genetic processes are important—such as population size.
The larger the network of co-operating and competing
population groups ("demes"), the faster any
mutations for advantageous alleles can spread. So large
landmass groups like East Asians and Europeans average
higher IQs than isolated hunter-gatherer groups like the
Inuit.
The discussion
of race and intelligence is being actively repressed on
campuses as I write these words. But intellectually, the
battle is over: Race realism has won.
Race Differences in Intelligence is a symbol and
a symptom of that victory. It may be Richard Lynn’s
crowning achievement.
J. Philippe Rushton [email
him]
is a professor of psychology at
the University of Western Ontario, the author of
Race, Evolution, and Behavior: A Life History
Perspective. This article is
adapted from
Personality and Individual Differences,
March 2006 (PDF)]