[ExI] A Gedanken Rational Eugenics Experiment (AGREE)

[Omar Rahman]

> Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2013 18:16:19 -0700
> From: rex <rex at nosyntax.net>
> To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> Subject: [ExI] A Gedanken Rational Eugenics Experiment (AGREE)
> 
> (I've no idea if anyone here is interested, but the best way to find
> out is to chum the water...)
> 
> Since IQ is highly heritable, all else being equal, mean IQ would rise
> if low IQ individuals were offered payment not to breed. How would
> such a program play out?
> 
> Simulation is a good way to explore the issue.

Their whole notion of 'national IQ' is so deeply flawed it is laughable. Just looking at and attempting to account for the bias in IQ tests is difficult enough, but rubbing that together with a notion of GDP which is connected to a fiat currency produces a rich creamy mousse of pure bullshit. An excerpt from the Wikipedia page about 'IQ and the Wealth of Nations':

> Criticism of data sets[edit]
> 
> Some criticisms have focused on the limited number of studies upon which the book is based. The IQ figure is based on one study in 34 nations, and two studies in 30 nations. There were actual tests for IQ in 81 nations. In 104 of the world's nations there were no IQ studies at all and IQ was estimated based on IQ in surrounding nations.[2] The limited number of participants in some studies has also been criticized. A test of 108 9-15-year olds in Barbados, of 50 13–16-year olds in Colombia, of 104 5–17-year olds in Ecuador, of 129 6–12-year olds in Egypt, and of 48 10–14-year olds in Equatorial Guinea, all were taken as measures of national IQ.[3]
> 
> Denny Borsboom (2006) argues that mainstream contemporary test analysis does not reflect substantial recent developments in the field and "bears an uncanny resemblance to the psychometric state of the art as it existed in the 1950s." For example, it argued that IQ and the Wealth of Nations, in order to show that the tests are unbiased, uses outdated methodology, if anything indicative that test bias exists.[12] Girma Berhanu in an essay review of the book concentrated on the discussion of Ethiopian Jews. The review criticizes the principal assertion of the authors that differences in intelligence attributed to genetics account for the gap between rich and poor countries. Berhanu criticized the book as being based in a "racist, sexist, and antihuman" research tradition and alleged that "the low standards of scholarship evident in the book render it largely irrelevant for modern science".[13]

We are not talking about 'bad data' in most of this........no data.

> Prodigy.  I do have a few modest observations. In Figure 2, the data is divided into contributions from four groups: blacks, (European) whites, East Asians and "others." I did not include the outliers: South Africa, Barbados, Qatar and China.

Also, 'I did not include the outliers X, Y, Z, aaaaaannnnnnnnd CHINA!' When  1/6 of humanity is an outlier even on your extremely poor data set maybe it's time to call it a day. Just maybe.

I find it odd that no one else who viewed that page didn't immediately comment on:

> Prodigy.  I noticed that too, Mentor, and computed a correlation coefficient for the 15 black nations as a group. The result, 0.034, confirms your observation. It seems there is an IQ threshold to be reached before a country can get off the ground economically. None of the black nations has yet reached this threshold. Here are the black-nation data.
>  
> Country	Avg
> IQ	per cap
> GDP
> Zambia	77	719
> Congo	73	995
> Uganda	73	1,074
> Sudan	72	1,394
> Jamaica	72	3,389
> Kenya	72	980
> Tanzania	72	480
> Ghana	71	1,735
> Nigeria	67	795
> Zimbabwe	66	2,669
> Guinea	66	1,782
> Congo	65	822
> Sierra Leone	64	458
> Ethiopia	63	574
> Equatorial Guinea	59	1,817

If you see 'data' indicating that the AVERAGE CITIZEN OF EQUATORIAL GUINEA IS SEVERELY MENTALLY RETARDED, the AVERAGE CITIZEN mind you, and you make any other conclusion than your data being horribly horribly wrong then well...

They say that 'travel broadens the mind' and therefore I can say with absolute conviction that 'Prodigy' is a pinhead for it is certain that he has never, ever, pulled his head out of his ass.

Regards,

Omar Rahman


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20131025/300e81fc/attachment.html>