Now that decision is out of my control, as my own personal decision on that would be arbitrary, and the statistics may not be in line with my position, however that does not negate the subject at hand, as most people could agree, within reason, what race a person is, and perhaps that is what the statistic is based on. But that question is one that you should consult the source on.
So you could say that the basis of measuring someones race is somewhat arbitrary right? Someone could be of predominantly black heritage but be really light skinned because his/her mom is white or whatever.
The point I'm getting at is that race is not rigorously defined and it can't be defined to specific individual categories. Many of the studies brought up when this IQ thing is debated, are self-reported or reported by the individual taking the study, making them a tough thing to interpret.
Many of the common right wing interpretations of this data is that there is genetic differences between races that give them a predisposition for a lower IQ. This
interpretation of the facts is inherently tribal because there is no scientific evidence for this, because again, race can't be defined to specific criteria.
What most of these studies
do measure though, is that people that
look different based on certain arbitrary characteristics that may correlate to geography (I say correlate because this is not always the case), are on average under educated. And these stats are different for every country, just because Americans that have black skin are, in general, under educated, doesn't mean people in other countries are also the same.
The cause of these disparities is debatable however, there is evidence to back up the claim that it is a product of systematic segregation or Jim Crow laws that brought widespread poverty and poor access to education to these communities in the 1960s.
My issue with bringing these things up is the implication that a specific interpretation of the facts is true without facts to back up that claim. Most people that bring up these IQ/race statistics rarely bring solutions to the table and they do so with language that implies that there's is scientific evidence to prove having black skin causes you to be dumber, when there is none. In Notchs case, he's doing it just to stir the pot and doesn't bring anything of substance to the table.
Do you see where I'm coming from? For the record I don't believe you are actually tribal or that the facts themselves are tribal, but there are some people who actually are tribal, that try to use these facts to affirm their racism. In reality, there is no scientific basis for their view.
I recommend you read some of the wikipedia page on scientifically justified racism(or at least read the sources) it really gives you a good overview of the touchiness of the issue.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_racism
