It has to do with everything but the average IQ-level of the people of the nations, the fact that failing nations all have a low average IQ is just a grand coincidence
Nutrition doesn't add IQ, it just prevents IQ decline.
It won't improve it. You can't get a higher IQ through protein shakes.
1 year ago
Anonymous
It "adds" IQ points by bringing the scores up to their full potential, kind of like how height works.
1 year ago
Anonymous
that's preventing decline, not adding.
Okay but WHY did the other succeed and one didn't
because of foreign intervention, no one is saying IQ is magical and life is a spreadsheet measured solely by one thing, but to say IQ has nothing to do with it is tremendously dishonest or ignorant.
North Korea would be a LOT worse off if their natural IQ was 85 instead of 103.
Where's the evidence those cultural differences have biological roots? We know chimpanzees differ from us because of biological differences, since they and their behaviors are described extensively in both field and lab environments.
>cultural differences have biological roots
ALL cultural differences have some degree of biological roots because culture is inherited in a way similar to that of ancestry and culture is always expressed by genes, i.e. humans who are comprised of genes. >we know this is true in the macro with chimps
yes, and it is true in the micro with humans.
the differences do not need to be solely biological in origin, but relative to what differences there are, biology plays a significant role.
as humans reckon the Dutch and The Irish are very similar broadly speaking, their differences are small and the differences they have will probably skew towards recent history (as they were the same people 3,000 years ago) rather than say 50,000 years of history.
If you put a bunch of Dutch infants in Ireland and a bunch of Irish infants in Holland, they would show more similarity with their ethnic kin than their ethnic dissimilars would.
This is not to say they are more like their ethnic kin than to their immediate neighbors, but relative to the others, they will be more like their ethnic kin than their ethnic neighbors are.
Dutch kids raised from infancy to adult in Ireland will be more like Dutch people in Holland than any random Irish person in Ireland, despite their material conditions being the same.
1 year ago
Anonymous
>that's preventing decline, not adding.
You might wanna get your IQ checked sometime. He's saying that malnourished nogs in Zaire might have the genetic potential for being 100 IQ on average, but are pulled down because of shit nutrition. Therefore, giving them better nutrition would in turn "increase" IQ by 15 points compared to now, by having them actually reach their potential. But well, why do I even tell that to someone who has nothing better to say than "Africans are dumb because they have low IQ potential lmao. Source? My ass"
1 year ago
Anonymous
>ALL cultural differences have some degree of biological roots because culture is inherited in a way similar to that of ancestry and culture is always expressed by genes, i.e. humans who are comprised of genes.
You're over-thinking this. Just because we're all comprised of genes doesn't mean that all cultural differences are the result of differences in our genes or that they're even genetic at all. You need more evidence to make claims like that.
Ethiopians are fricking moronic on IQ tests, yet their country is calling big shots in Africa. So why is Ethiopia doing well but Somalia like shit? Somalians are pretty much the same as Ethiopians genetically, so it can't be that.
>human prosperity is based on institutions >institutions can encourage work or discourage it >explains poverty better than geographical, cultural or biological determinism
No, a good institution is something that rewards work and setting up of businesses.
So like if you live in south america you probably have to bribe a politician, police, cartel or all three to set up a business which isn't a good incentive for wealth creation
This. Well-working social and economic institutions are founded on universal principles of just conduct. Criminally delinquent populations like sub-Saharan Blacks and israelites (who commit 35 to 37 percent of all major financial crime in the USA) are basically reduced to being either blue collar or white collar Parasites, populations that exploit the law abiding behavior of the white majority, who are tasked with keeping the overall social and economic system in good working order.
institutions are created by Men and their complexity and manifestation is a result of the Men who construct them, never would you find The Dutch and the Irish producing identical institutions, diverse people arrive at diverse conclusions. This is immense when take in the vast spectrum of human populations.
What institution could we give to chimpanzees to allow them to prosper like us?
right because they are different from us in biological ways and this extreme illustrates the supremacy of biological factors.
But they had the from the beginning the same culture and people, what force changed that?
1 year ago
Anonymous
You commit a fallacy thinking culture is something set in stone in the past.
1 year ago
Anonymous
The point is that something changed, and it probably isn't a coincidence that the countey that made it easier for the citizens to enrich themselves got more rich citizens. The point of focusing on those institutions is that we can move on from clearly deficient markers such as pure economic growth or democracy in name only
What biological differences produce Dutch and Irish institutions?
1 year ago
Anonymous
The biological differences between the Dutch and The Irish >like what
the ones that make them fricking Dutch and Irish lmao
Do you not understand what ancestry is?
Explain South and North Korea
North Korea does not have the agency of South Korea due to foreign powers intervening with both, if you were to put a Nork and Sork together in a neutral environment they would build similar things and be capable of working together.
1 year ago
Anonymous
Okay but WHY did the other succeed and one didn't
1 year ago
Anonymous
Where's the evidence those cultural differences have biological roots? We know chimpanzees differ from us because of biological differences, since they and their behaviors are described extensively in both field and lab environments.
The institutions are of course shaped by those, but can be imported. So institutions are better explanation than a pure geographic, cultural or biological dterminism
His whole arguments is circular. Bad nations fail because they are bad. Good nations fail because they are good. At no point does actually try explain why some nations have bad institutions (hint: it's because of geography, culture and biology).
cont.
It perfectly encapsulates the vacuosness of modern liberalism that this book that essentially says nothing but lists some historical anecdotes is treated as supreme revelation.
>overwhelmingly influential factors like economics, geography, technology
First of all, the whole books is about economic institutions which are followed by technology, second, if you want a model to make states prosperous you kind of want it to work as independent from geography
Inclusion is more an effect of prosperity than a cause. When you are not faced with poverty you no longer have to form close knit clans that guard the few resources you have, prosperous industrialized societies also need to trade for resources and promote people from the lower classes and so are generally more open for practical reasons.
Some level of "inclusion" is needed, a paranoid isolated society might be a bit of a disadvantage, but beyond that it doesn't really matter. Japan's Meiji restoration was accomplished with only a handful of "oyatoi gaikokujin" who usually left once their work was complete, the absolute bare minimum of "diversity", they certainly didn't need African refugees to "survive".
It is just a fantasy, one being sold due to modern sensibilities. Every historian learns about the biases of the past, but they must also be aware of the biases of the present, regardless of how they feel about it. Remember, one day this too shall pass and future historians will be judging us.
Inclusion is a meme when there is no center willing to affirm itself. See Safavid Iran or Moscovy for example. They saw foreigners (not a 1:1 situation but bear with it) as cows to milk for specific fields and thus barely attempted to steal their thunder, since foreigners will always exist.
not reading it, give me the cliff notes
It has to do with everything but the average IQ-level of the people of the nations, the fact that failing nations all have a low average IQ is just a grand coincidence
Good thing he didn't bring any examples of same people living under different institutions!
it's because you can't saddle zebras
Can't exactly call Gulf states failed, even though they are soulles and full of moronic people.
Nutrition adds 15 IQ.
Its rather prosperity that leads to IQ
genes add another 15
Nutrition doesn't add IQ, it just prevents IQ decline.
It won't improve it. You can't get a higher IQ through protein shakes.
It "adds" IQ points by bringing the scores up to their full potential, kind of like how height works.
that's preventing decline, not adding.
because of foreign intervention, no one is saying IQ is magical and life is a spreadsheet measured solely by one thing, but to say IQ has nothing to do with it is tremendously dishonest or ignorant.
North Korea would be a LOT worse off if their natural IQ was 85 instead of 103.
>cultural differences have biological roots
ALL cultural differences have some degree of biological roots because culture is inherited in a way similar to that of ancestry and culture is always expressed by genes, i.e. humans who are comprised of genes.
>we know this is true in the macro with chimps
yes, and it is true in the micro with humans.
the differences do not need to be solely biological in origin, but relative to what differences there are, biology plays a significant role.
as humans reckon the Dutch and The Irish are very similar broadly speaking, their differences are small and the differences they have will probably skew towards recent history (as they were the same people 3,000 years ago) rather than say 50,000 years of history.
If you put a bunch of Dutch infants in Ireland and a bunch of Irish infants in Holland, they would show more similarity with their ethnic kin than their ethnic dissimilars would.
This is not to say they are more like their ethnic kin than to their immediate neighbors, but relative to the others, they will be more like their ethnic kin than their ethnic neighbors are.
Dutch kids raised from infancy to adult in Ireland will be more like Dutch people in Holland than any random Irish person in Ireland, despite their material conditions being the same.
>that's preventing decline, not adding.
You might wanna get your IQ checked sometime. He's saying that malnourished nogs in Zaire might have the genetic potential for being 100 IQ on average, but are pulled down because of shit nutrition. Therefore, giving them better nutrition would in turn "increase" IQ by 15 points compared to now, by having them actually reach their potential. But well, why do I even tell that to someone who has nothing better to say than "Africans are dumb because they have low IQ potential lmao. Source? My ass"
>ALL cultural differences have some degree of biological roots because culture is inherited in a way similar to that of ancestry and culture is always expressed by genes, i.e. humans who are comprised of genes.
You're over-thinking this. Just because we're all comprised of genes doesn't mean that all cultural differences are the result of differences in our genes or that they're even genetic at all. You need more evidence to make claims like that.
Ethiopians are fricking moronic on IQ tests, yet their country is calling big shots in Africa. So why is Ethiopia doing well but Somalia like shit? Somalians are pretty much the same as Ethiopians genetically, so it can't be that.
So what is it?
>human prosperity is based on institutions
>institutions can encourage work or discourage it
>explains poverty better than geographical, cultural or biological determinism
>institutions
And what makes a good institution? It wouldn't happen to be intelligent leadership would it?
No, a good institution is something that rewards work and setting up of businesses.
So like if you live in south america you probably have to bribe a politician, police, cartel or all three to set up a business which isn't a good incentive for wealth creation
public trust
This. Well-working social and economic institutions are founded on universal principles of just conduct. Criminally delinquent populations like sub-Saharan Blacks and israelites (who commit 35 to 37 percent of all major financial crime in the USA) are basically reduced to being either blue collar or white collar Parasites, populations that exploit the law abiding behavior of the white majority, who are tasked with keeping the overall social and economic system in good working order.
institutions are created by Men and their complexity and manifestation is a result of the Men who construct them, never would you find The Dutch and the Irish producing identical institutions, diverse people arrive at diverse conclusions. This is immense when take in the vast spectrum of human populations.
What institution could we give to chimpanzees to allow them to prosper like us?
right because they are different from us in biological ways and this extreme illustrates the supremacy of biological factors.
Explain South and North Korea
Ideological i.e. cultural differences.
But they had the from the beginning the same culture and people, what force changed that?
You commit a fallacy thinking culture is something set in stone in the past.
The point is that something changed, and it probably isn't a coincidence that the countey that made it easier for the citizens to enrich themselves got more rich citizens. The point of focusing on those institutions is that we can move on from clearly deficient markers such as pure economic growth or democracy in name only
What biological differences produce Dutch and Irish institutions?
The biological differences between the Dutch and The Irish
>like what
the ones that make them fricking Dutch and Irish lmao
Do you not understand what ancestry is?
North Korea does not have the agency of South Korea due to foreign powers intervening with both, if you were to put a Nork and Sork together in a neutral environment they would build similar things and be capable of working together.
Okay but WHY did the other succeed and one didn't
Where's the evidence those cultural differences have biological roots? We know chimpanzees differ from us because of biological differences, since they and their behaviors are described extensively in both field and lab environments.
>geographical, cultural or biological determinism
How? Where do institutions come from?
me
🙂
The institutions are of course shaped by those, but can be imported. So institutions are better explanation than a pure geographic, cultural or biological dterminism
His whole arguments is circular. Bad nations fail because they are bad. Good nations fail because they are good. At no point does actually try explain why some nations have bad institutions (hint: it's because of geography, culture and biology).
So a model that takes geography, culture and biology is superior to one that doesnt take anything into account? So you already agree with the book?
cont.
It perfectly encapsulates the vacuosness of modern liberalism that this book that essentially says nothing but lists some historical anecdotes is treated as supreme revelation.
nations fail because they are not inclusive and diverse enough, evidence is cherry picked confirmation bias
overwhelmingly influential factors like economics, geography, technology and so on are skimmed over
>overwhelmingly influential factors like economics, geography, technology
First of all, the whole books is about economic institutions which are followed by technology, second, if you want a model to make states prosperous you kind of want it to work as independent from geography
>moronation must be refuted or else it means it's true!
no
ok, then what makes you think it's moronic?
>alexander empire collapsed due elites frickery
>so mongols
>1776 revolution
etc
Inclusion is more an effect of prosperity than a cause. When you are not faced with poverty you no longer have to form close knit clans that guard the few resources you have, prosperous industrialized societies also need to trade for resources and promote people from the lower classes and so are generally more open for practical reasons.
Some level of "inclusion" is needed, a paranoid isolated society might be a bit of a disadvantage, but beyond that it doesn't really matter. Japan's Meiji restoration was accomplished with only a handful of "oyatoi gaikokujin" who usually left once their work was complete, the absolute bare minimum of "diversity", they certainly didn't need African refugees to "survive".
It is just a fantasy, one being sold due to modern sensibilities. Every historian learns about the biases of the past, but they must also be aware of the biases of the present, regardless of how they feel about it. Remember, one day this too shall pass and future historians will be judging us.
Inclusion does not mean diversity in this context, it means you dont have to bribe somebody to open up a business
Inclusion is a meme when there is no center willing to affirm itself. See Safavid Iran or Moscovy for example. They saw foreigners (not a 1:1 situation but bear with it) as cows to milk for specific fields and thus barely attempted to steal their thunder, since foreigners will always exist.
No one in this thread has read the book or at most 2 people.
Everyone in this thread has read the book or at least 2 people.