"I don't give a fuck whose fault it is. Is it true or not, and what are we going to do about it?" Dayam, Glenn. That's the kind of shit I find myself saying, but only when know no one is listening! 😁
John's anecdote about the guy on the plane hits the mark, and there are plenty of white people who fit the same profile. I grew up in a largely rural area, and I grew up with a lot of these people (I've even related to some of them)...except in this case it was a "country" or "redneck" culture. I'm convinced these are pretty much the same people with only a few superficial differences.
As you inevitably return to the first question featured in the best-of compilation, it would be nice to hear John draw less on anecdote and more on first-hand evidence available in his work in linguistics. For example, he could share with the audience what he knows about the complexity and diversity of natural language and how that provides a transracial window into the human mind.
Secondly, I would love to hear you make a clear distinction between innate capacity at birth and aptitude following a childhood of cultural deprivation. They are not the same thing and this fact is so often glossed over. You cannot expect a high school student who has never read a book to match his peers on the test through any amount of hard work. He will always be, on average, less equipped to function in the modern world. This is has implications in real time.
Although certainly not a definitive refutation of the hereditarian position, there are a couple of interesting empirical data points that I think argue in favor of a cultural component to group differences.
First, I only recently learned about the disproportionate success of Africans at the highest levels of competitive Scrabble. Most interestingly, it was observed that among elite non-Black Scrabble competitors, there appeared to be an over-representation of individuals with high mathematical aptitude.
Second, as John himself has pointed out, African immigrants out-perform African Americans academically despite the latter being around 20% European on average and roughly 1 standard deviation above sub-Saharan Africans in mean IQ according to the psychometric literature. Hereditarians often assert that selective immigration can easily explain this fact given the much larger population of sub-Saharan Africa relative to the Black American population, but a look at the numbers suggests otherwise.
If we assume that the average Black American IQ is 85 and the average IQ of sub-Saharan Africans is 70 per race science, that would mean that an IQ of 130 is +3 SD above the mean for African Americans and +4 SD above the mean for Africans. I use an IQ threshold of 130 because that's roughly the average intelligence of undergraduates at a lower tier Ivy League university and thus a reasonable proxy for those occupying the elite avenues of society.
+3 SD above the mean is roughly 1 in 740 while +4 SD above the mean is roughly 1 in 33,333. That suggests that on a per capita basis there are 45 times as many African Americans with an IQ above 130 as there are Africans above that same threshold. Given that the population of sub-Saharan Africa is around 1138 million versus roughly 40 million for African Americans, a ratio of only 28.45 or so, this means that in theory there should be more African Americans in absolute terms than Africans with an IQ above 130.
Assuming that our underlying numbers are correct then, what one actually observes vis-a-vis the performance of the two groups runs totally contrary to what one would've expected, especially if we also assume reasonably that the total percentage of Africans above the IQ 130 threshold in the United States is far from being 100% of the sub-Saharan African total.
A Martian anthropologist who observed the dynamics of Black performance in the US would almost certainly be surprised to learn that according to the hereditarian thesis the higher performing Black sub-group was being drawn from a population 1 SD lower in average IQ. I think at the very least this should give hereditarians some pause about the assumptions underlying their mental models.
Having said all that, I second your opinion that it would be nice if John relied a bit less on anecdote and a bit more on empirical evidence in defending his egalitarian position, although I'm certainly not knocking his anecdotal recollections by any means. Personally I find them to be an interesting reflection of his own lived experiences and suspect that there's some deeply meaningful truth to them.
Nice stats, Yan. To be sure, the psychometric literature is muddled by politics, so I tend to take it with a pinch of salt. I've also read things that suggest that SDs vary substantially by group, which might factor into your numbers above. In any case, I wouldn't expect John or Glenn to cite any of this stuff off-hand, and like you, I highly value John's thoughts in whatever form they take. His anecdotes in particular are relatable and often amusing. On this specific question, however, I think he could have said a lot more that pertains to linguistics and a theory of mind, especially given his expertise and some pretty basic falsehoods that persist among the public about language, typology, and cognition. To my second point above, the subject of linguistics also sheds light on critical periods for learning and development.
It's interesting that as much as the achievement of African immigrants is used to refute the "terrifying possibility" of black inferiority, it is probably the ever-troubled state of the African continent that plays most immediately on the fears of those who would dispense with the standardized test.
Looking forward to seeing the highlights, Glenn. I watch all your videos but it will be interesting to see the year in review; so much happened in 2023.
I'll pass cuz I've seen literally every episode featuring the two of you. But I look forward to the next, and the next and the next, and the next. Happy New Year.
Folks, Glenn's last mailing to his subscribers was about his decision to stay on Substack after the "literal Nazis" accusation hit piece in The Atlantic.
Freddie De Boer has written an often hilarious article for his own Substack about this affair and well worth reading.
"How on earth so many educated and successful professionals continue to believe that there is some celestial authority out there who will eliminate fascism if only we pass the right legislation, I cannot understand. Not one of us will live to see the elimination of fascism. Luckily, actual fascism is a tiny fringe ideology that has no power. Unluckily, mainstream conservatism, and its great enabler mainstream liberalism, are bad enough"
As posted on YouTube...
"I don't give a fuck whose fault it is. Is it true or not, and what are we going to do about it?" Dayam, Glenn. That's the kind of shit I find myself saying, but only when know no one is listening! 😁
John's anecdote about the guy on the plane hits the mark, and there are plenty of white people who fit the same profile. I grew up in a largely rural area, and I grew up with a lot of these people (I've even related to some of them)...except in this case it was a "country" or "redneck" culture. I'm convinced these are pretty much the same people with only a few superficial differences.
happy new year boss. i am looking forward to this.
best into 24
James
HNY to Glenn and John and all in the readership.
As you inevitably return to the first question featured in the best-of compilation, it would be nice to hear John draw less on anecdote and more on first-hand evidence available in his work in linguistics. For example, he could share with the audience what he knows about the complexity and diversity of natural language and how that provides a transracial window into the human mind.
Secondly, I would love to hear you make a clear distinction between innate capacity at birth and aptitude following a childhood of cultural deprivation. They are not the same thing and this fact is so often glossed over. You cannot expect a high school student who has never read a book to match his peers on the test through any amount of hard work. He will always be, on average, less equipped to function in the modern world. This is has implications in real time.
Although certainly not a definitive refutation of the hereditarian position, there are a couple of interesting empirical data points that I think argue in favor of a cultural component to group differences.
https://glennloury.substack.com/p/february-q-and-a-part-1/comment/5335113
First, I only recently learned about the disproportionate success of Africans at the highest levels of competitive Scrabble. Most interestingly, it was observed that among elite non-Black Scrabble competitors, there appeared to be an over-representation of individuals with high mathematical aptitude.
Second, as John himself has pointed out, African immigrants out-perform African Americans academically despite the latter being around 20% European on average and roughly 1 standard deviation above sub-Saharan Africans in mean IQ according to the psychometric literature. Hereditarians often assert that selective immigration can easily explain this fact given the much larger population of sub-Saharan Africa relative to the Black American population, but a look at the numbers suggests otherwise.
If we assume that the average Black American IQ is 85 and the average IQ of sub-Saharan Africans is 70 per race science, that would mean that an IQ of 130 is +3 SD above the mean for African Americans and +4 SD above the mean for Africans. I use an IQ threshold of 130 because that's roughly the average intelligence of undergraduates at a lower tier Ivy League university and thus a reasonable proxy for those occupying the elite avenues of society.
+3 SD above the mean is roughly 1 in 740 while +4 SD above the mean is roughly 1 in 33,333. That suggests that on a per capita basis there are 45 times as many African Americans with an IQ above 130 as there are Africans above that same threshold. Given that the population of sub-Saharan Africa is around 1138 million versus roughly 40 million for African Americans, a ratio of only 28.45 or so, this means that in theory there should be more African Americans in absolute terms than Africans with an IQ above 130.
Assuming that our underlying numbers are correct then, what one actually observes vis-a-vis the performance of the two groups runs totally contrary to what one would've expected, especially if we also assume reasonably that the total percentage of Africans above the IQ 130 threshold in the United States is far from being 100% of the sub-Saharan African total.
A Martian anthropologist who observed the dynamics of Black performance in the US would almost certainly be surprised to learn that according to the hereditarian thesis the higher performing Black sub-group was being drawn from a population 1 SD lower in average IQ. I think at the very least this should give hereditarians some pause about the assumptions underlying their mental models.
Having said all that, I second your opinion that it would be nice if John relied a bit less on anecdote and a bit more on empirical evidence in defending his egalitarian position, although I'm certainly not knocking his anecdotal recollections by any means. Personally I find them to be an interesting reflection of his own lived experiences and suspect that there's some deeply meaningful truth to them.
Nice stats, Yan. To be sure, the psychometric literature is muddled by politics, so I tend to take it with a pinch of salt. I've also read things that suggest that SDs vary substantially by group, which might factor into your numbers above. In any case, I wouldn't expect John or Glenn to cite any of this stuff off-hand, and like you, I highly value John's thoughts in whatever form they take. His anecdotes in particular are relatable and often amusing. On this specific question, however, I think he could have said a lot more that pertains to linguistics and a theory of mind, especially given his expertise and some pretty basic falsehoods that persist among the public about language, typology, and cognition. To my second point above, the subject of linguistics also sheds light on critical periods for learning and development.
It's interesting that as much as the achievement of African immigrants is used to refute the "terrifying possibility" of black inferiority, it is probably the ever-troubled state of the African continent that plays most immediately on the fears of those who would dispense with the standardized test.
"hereditarians"
Oh, is THAT politically correct word we're using in 2024? =)
Feel free to refer to them as Nazis. :)
Despite their many obviously bad ideas, personally I do give the Nazis credit for highlighting the dangers of cigarette smoking.
Looking forward to seeing the highlights, Glenn. I watch all your videos but it will be interesting to see the year in review; so much happened in 2023.
Happy 2024 Glenn!
I'll pass cuz I've seen literally every episode featuring the two of you. But I look forward to the next, and the next and the next, and the next. Happy New Year.
Every episode, Holmes? You are my hero! I am enjoying the hell out of the "greatest hits" video but look forward to the new one too.
And I have downloaded the vast majority of them as well. At least the audio.
And btw, time FLIES.
Folks, Glenn's last mailing to his subscribers was about his decision to stay on Substack after the "literal Nazis" accusation hit piece in The Atlantic.
Freddie De Boer has written an often hilarious article for his own Substack about this affair and well worth reading.
"How on earth so many educated and successful professionals continue to believe that there is some celestial authority out there who will eliminate fascism if only we pass the right legislation, I cannot understand. Not one of us will live to see the elimination of fascism. Luckily, actual fascism is a tiny fringe ideology that has no power. Unluckily, mainstream conservatism, and its great enabler mainstream liberalism, are bad enough"
https://freddiedeboer.substack.com/p/these-rules-about-platforming-nazis