East Asians are the most intelligent of the human race
Scroll to see replies
Original post by Namige
You're confusing the willingness to work hard and being forced to work hard. I'm asian, and I've spoken to my family, and they say the children there work very hard. Because they know they benefit in the long run, and because they want to support their family. Why? No state pensions.
No, I'm not confusing them. I'm also Asian (South Korean) and I've lived in South Korea and it's definitely present. I'm forced to work hard at home until midnight, even though I work harder than the majority of people here. This is the same case for other students but worse. No state pensions?! I don't know about you but it definitely exists in my home country. People work hard to get into the top universities and then burn out by the time they get there. It's all about success and this problem has been highlighted in Korea. Students slave away for hours studying and lose sleep. It's not healthy and it's created a culture of stress and brewed a society of a lot of suicidal teens.
Posted from TSR Mobile
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by Observatory
IQ correlates strongly with the ability to succeed in education, get and perform well in a high skilled job, win chess tournaments, and solve problems, so IQ does measure intelligence in the plain English sense of the word.
You should remember just because there seems to be a correlation doesn't mean you can say they are identical. Many people fall into this trap. You have to remember IQ measures mostly mathematical ability, and not intelligence, which is why I have a high IQ - not because I am intelligent, but because I find mathematics easy.
Original post by Observatory
I didn't say they were good leaders - that's just a value judgement - I said that they succeeded in taking possession of the government. This is an IQ-loaded task, just like winning a chess tournament or performing brain surgery.
I didn't say they were good leaders - that's just a value judgement - I said that they succeeded in taking possession of the government. This is an IQ-loaded task, just like winning a chess tournament or performing brain surgery.
I guess this is a difference of opinion. I don't think you can call taking control of a government an IQ loaded task. Just look around the world, people take control by using fear, not intelligence, the same thing the Nazis did.
Original post by Observatory
If this is responsible for IQ differences then, as I said, you should support colonial regimes that force children in Africa to do these things too. The medicine may be harsh at first, but they will thank us in two decades when their national IQs converge.
However, descendants of Sub-Saharan Africans show a substantial IQ gap with North Europeans even when they have been brought up in the West, so I have my doubts that
this will happen
However, descendants of Sub-Saharan Africans show a substantial IQ gap with North Europeans even when they have been brought up in the West, so I have my doubts that
this will happen
I don't support that for the simple reason that every country should be allowed to have sovereignty over their own nation. I doubt you would like another nation to save us from our "freedom" here in the west, by invading us and forcing to convert to their particular religion. Of course, once we're all converted in two decades we would be thanking them......
Original post by Observatory
Original post by Observatory
Original post by Freier._.lance
You should remember just because there seems to be a correlation doesn't mean you can say they are identical. Many people fall into this trap. You have to remember IQ measures mostly mathematical ability, and not intelligence, which is why I have a high IQ - not because I am intelligent, but because I find mathematics easy.
Mathematics is a highly intelligence-loaded task; I don't see the contradiction. Furthermore it's very rare to encounter someone who is exceptional at mathematics and absolutely hopeless at everything else. You may encounter someone who is far above average at mathematics, and only somewhat above average at everything else, but that is quite different. Taking your claims at face value, I doubt your grades are below the national average in English, history, or modern languages.
I guess this is a difference of opinion. I don't think you can call taking control of a government an IQ loaded task. Just look around the world, people take control by using fear, not intelligence, the same thing the Nazis did.
I don't see the contradiction, as if anyone can just "use fear", an apparently trivial task, and become the government. To the extent that governments do rule through fear, it must be supported by a complex infrastructure of propaganda and academic apologia, and formal and informal repression, something that neither creates nor organises itself. That's after you dealt with the previous government, who have all the same tools potentially in this hands, and a desire to remain in power.
I can certainly identify countries whose leaders seem to me to be stupid, but they are generally leaders of countries whose populations have low IQs. Robert Mugabe, who successfully completed several UoL correspondence degrees in a country with an average IQ of 66, is probably one of the most intelligent men to ever have been born in Zimbabwe.
I don't support that for the simple reason that every country should be allowed to have sovereignty over their own nation. I doubt you would like another nation to save us from our "freedom" here in the west, by invading us and forcing to convert to their particular religion. Of course, once we're all converted in two decades we would be thanking them......
Western countries are well governed and have high IQs; I don't see the logical correspondence between "Replace the governments of African countries to raise their IQs dramatically, making them our equals." and, "Replace the governments of Western countries to forcibly convert the population to some religion.". Being intelligent, and therefore able to earn more and manage one's life better, are objective not subjective benefits.
Moreover you are subject to exactly this logic in the West. Neither you nor your parents were allowed to choose not to send you to school. That freedom was taken from you by the government and if you had disregarded the government, your parents' freedom would have been removed entirely. My sense is that you thank the government for this. It's only the mystical conception of nations that separates those two cases, but I see no moral strength in this argument. If individual people who compose some group do not have a certain right, they cannot give it to the group.
Original post by clh_hilary
Someone living 25 years ago cannot imagine living in 2014 either. You can say that to any era, any period, anywhere ever.
True, and I'm not denying the achievements of Chinese civilisation, but I would hardly say it "puts the West to shame", that's all.
Original post by felamaslen
True, and I'm not denying the achievements of Chinese civilisation, but I would hardly say it "puts the West to shame", that's all.
I should have used past tense.
Original post by clh_hilary
I should have used past tense.
Oh, are you saying that at the time the West was put to shame by China? In which case, of course! The West was in the so-called "dark ages" then.
Original post by Observatory
I don't see the contradiction, as if anyone can just "use fear", an apparently trivial task, and become the government. To the extent that governments do rule through fear, it must be supported by a complex infrastructure of propaganda and academic apologia, and formal and informal repression, something that neither creates nor organises itself. That's after you dealt with the previous government, who have all the same tools potentially in this hands, and a desire to remain in power.
I don't see the contradiction, as if anyone can just "use fear", an apparently trivial task, and become the government. To the extent that governments do rule through fear, it must be supported by a complex infrastructure of propaganda and academic apologia, and formal and informal repression, something that neither creates nor organises itself. That's after you dealt with the previous government, who have all the same tools potentially in this hands, and a desire to remain in power.
The taliban use fear in Pakistan, I would say they are not intelligent in the slightest. Anyone can pick up a gun, form a gang and use fear to get what they want.Of course you're right to say Hitler himself was highly intelligent.
Original post by Llamageddon
Apart from, err, literacy... and everything else.
Chinese academics do not have to work in China. Why would it matter that the universities of China are corrupt if the academic in question does not have to work there?
Chinese academics do not have to work in China. Why would it matter that the universities of China are corrupt if the academic in question does not have to work there?
No. As I said Im talking about the new generation. They are literate and everything. With far better maths skills than anyone here.
They pretty much do. All the Chinese academics who work outside China will convert to a different nationality. If you count Chinese heritage then a few people has already won the Nobel prize.
Original post by Freier._.lance
The taliban use fear in Pakistan, I would say they are not intelligent in the slightest. Anyone can pick up a gun, form a gang and use fear to get what they want.Of course you're right to say Hitler himself was highly intelligent.
The Taliban aren't a recognised government, they're an insurgent movement, so they're not winners in the government-ing competition (though, of course, nor are they total losers). I have very little information on the personalities involved but it doesn't surprise me they wouldn't compete in the intelligence stakes with the actual government of Pakistan, let alone governments of countries like Israel.
Nonetheless I think that armed gangs are probably led by people of above average intelligence everywhere. Bin Laden was much cleverer than the average Taliban fighter. Gerry Adams is much cleverer than the average Bogside brawler. Al Capone was much cleverer than the typical mafioso goon.
Original post by KongShou
No. As I said Im talking about the new generation. They are literate and everything. With far better maths skills than anyone here.
They pretty much do. All the Chinese academics who work outside China will convert to a different nationality. If you count Chinese heritage then a few people has already won the Nobel prize.
They pretty much do. All the Chinese academics who work outside China will convert to a different nationality. If you count Chinese heritage then a few people has already won the Nobel prize.
I think chinese have strong maths skills but lack imagination or lateral thinking. compare wth south korea, a much smaller country but punching well above their weight and grew far faster than china originaly
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by KongShou
No. As I said Im talking about the new generation. They are literate and everything. With far better maths skills than anyone here.
They pretty much do. All the Chinese academics who work outside China will convert to a different nationality. If you count Chinese heritage then a few people has already won the Nobel prize.
Original post by Doctor_Einstein
Wrong. To be Jewish, you ether (A) have Jewish ancestry, or (B) have adopted the Jewish religion, or (C) have married into a Jewish family. Any of these entitles you to be Jewish and entitles you to citizenship of Israel.
Most of those Nobel prize winners I referred to were Jewish by ancestry, not by religion.
Most of those Nobel prize winners I referred to were Jewish by ancestry, not by religion.
wow.. didn't know that!
Original post by Yw56
CONCLUSION....
East Asians are the most intelligent?
East Asians are the most intelligent?
That's not the conclusion.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Arieisit
Voldemort be silent.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Ana81
You shouldn't be on this thread, no one is going to use 3 letter words so that you will understand.
Posted from TSR Mobile
I'm confused.
So why not go as far as to say that Whites are more intelligent than Blacks ?
Or that Men are more intelligent than Women.
Or that people born with physical disabilities are less intelligent than those born healthy.
I'm sure ,by the criteria you guys are using, that these are the results you would yield.
So why not go as far as to say that Whites are more intelligent than Blacks ?
Or that Men are more intelligent than Women.
Or that people born with physical disabilities are less intelligent than those born healthy.
I'm sure ,by the criteria you guys are using, that these are the results you would yield.
Original post by cambio wechsel
Really? Can it sensibly be argued that "the Nobel Prize Committee", actually a number of committees convened in different fields and with changing constituencies reflecting a hundred year existence, has consistently been biased toward Jews?
Seems like tinfoil-hat bull****.
Seems like tinfoil-hat bull****.
Actually it can, Nobel Commitees themselves have been made up of disproportionate amounts of Jews.
lmao OP is just 
We all know dumb Asians we all know dumb whites dumb blacks, etc. It's about the capacity and discipline of the individual to learn or not. Not the race. I will say that East Asians MIGHT have stricter values and standards for education and youngsters which pressures them to learn at a different pace and therefore be "smarter" but that certainly isn't for every Asian, especially in the West. And think about the poverty levels in Asia, a lot of people can't even read/work there. So being Japanese or Chinese or whatever does not make you smart, how ironically stupid to say.
We all know dumb Asians we all know dumb whites dumb blacks, etc. It's about the capacity and discipline of the individual to learn or not. Not the race. I will say that East Asians MIGHT have stricter values and standards for education and youngsters which pressures them to learn at a different pace and therefore be "smarter" but that certainly isn't for every Asian, especially in the West. And think about the poverty levels in Asia, a lot of people can't even read/work there. So being Japanese or Chinese or whatever does not make you smart, how ironically stupid to say.Original post by Arieisit
You shouldn't be on this thread, no one is going to use 3 letter words so that you will understand.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Posted from TSR Mobile
Neither should you as we aren't discussing the best lubrication to use.
oh look a pic of your university campus
Posted from TSR Mobile
(edited 9 years ago)
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- question for british girls
- Would east asian guys go for european girls
- Indian men
- Do Japanese/ Korean girls like Indian/ Pakistan/ Bangladesh guys?
- do Indian guys like mixed race girls
- George Takei should have been a journalist!
- Why British Girl/ Men do not date Indian Boy/ Men and prefer Black Men/Boy?
- do girls like brown guys
- I feel like people don't want to date me because of my race
- Was I being rude or was the person being racist?
- Language degrees
- Exchange to the UK
- Asian and Middle Eastern Studies (AMES) at Cambridge
- fellow asians of the UK rise up
- asian girls
- (A Level Politics / Feminism) Help with 2 questions
- Is Elon Musk right? AI will replace all jobs?
- Crush on black girl at uni ? (Uofg)
- Relationships and ethnicity
- Girls rank in order of importance for dating a guy - vice versa for the guys.
Latest
Trending
Last reply 1 week ago
If you could instantly become fluent in any foreign language which one would it be?Last reply 3 months ago
About the NCUK IFY Program for university Studies in the UKTrending
Last reply 1 week ago
If you could instantly become fluent in any foreign language which one would it be?Last reply 3 months ago
About the NCUK IFY Program for university Studies in the UK
