The first edition of Lynn and Vanhanen's IQ and the Wealth of Nations reported four studies from India from 1959-1986, with averages varying only across a rather narrow range of 78-82.
On the other hand, as I've pointed out since 2002, India is the most complicated country in the world, so it's hard to get a nationally representative sample.
Further, the higher IQs registered by Indians in their diaspora, like the higher IQs recorded by African Americans and West Indians compared to Africans, suggests that better nutrition, health, education, and so forth could raise the relative standing of Indians. After all, they've been plagued by extreme poverty, which is starting to abate. For example, India is particularly beset by lack of iodine in the diet, which is a relatively easy IQ-lowering problem to deal with.
Rec1Man's goal has been to come up with a model that's simple enough to comprehend. Lots of critics in the comments responded that his eight part categorization of Indian demographics was too simple. As Einstein said, Science should be as simple as possible, but no simpler.
Still, we need somewhere to start, so Rec1Man's model, after being refined over the last few weeks, seems like a decent starting point.
First, here is fellow commenter Nsam's verbal summary of Rec1Man's approach, followed by Rec1Man's latest quantitative summary:
Here is my attempt at a summary of rec1man's analyses. Edit as required.
This eight-segment breakdown of the Indian population provides a more accurate picture of the human resource potential of the Indian population, compared to simplistic unimodal population model with mean IQ of 85 and SD =15.
The Indian population can be grouped in terms of the four traditional caste super-categories :
1. Brahmin
2. Merchant,
3. Peasant,
4.1 Dalit ("Untouchable")
4.2 Scheduled Caste
4.3 Low caste converts to Islamcross-cutting with a
A. North vs.
B. Southgeographical distinction.
Note: The usage of the 4 caste supercategories is not literal. For the purposes of estimating national average IQ, Syrian Christians or Parsees would be lumped in with the Brahmins, and the few peasant castes with a literate tradition would be moved up to the merchant class.
The "Brahmin" and "Merchants" have had multiple generations of a literate tradition and also engaged in professions that required greater cognitive ability (memorization, calculation), compared to the "Peasants" (who formed the ranks of the warrior class and had/have the most political power) and Dalits (who also have the least amount of central-west asian-european admixture and have been engaged in menial tasks on the fringes of society). [As in the Cochran-Harpending model of the evolution of high average Ashkenazi Jewish IQs, under Malthusian pressure, these occupational slots are theorized to have selected for higher IQs. -- Steve]
This model posits an IQ penalty for North Indian groups as a result of Islamic invasions/genocide of north Indian elites over a millennium.
Improvement in living conditions, nutrition, and access to education is expected to increase mean IQ by 7.5 points by the end of this century, relative to the Anglo-American average. India has the human resource potential to be to be a developed society with advanced technological capabilities by the end of this century. The cognitive elites of India will primarily come from the Brahmin and Merchant super-categories and numerically compare favorably with the other Asian superpower China.
And here's Rec1Man's latest summary table:
Current IQ
Southern Brahmin, 1% @ 120 IQ
Northern Brahmin, 4% @ 115 IQ
Southern Merchant, 3% @ 110 IQ
Northern Merchant, 12% @ 105 IQ
Southern Peasant, 8% @ 93 IQ
Northern Peasant, 32% @ 88 IQ
Muslim, 15% @ 75 iQ
Southern Dalit, 5% @ 75 IQ
Northern Dalit, 20% @ 75IQAvg = 86.10 IQ
Current Flynn for India is +7.8Hypothesized Flynn effect for India in 21st Century:
Brahmins and merchants = +5
Peasants = +7
Muslims and Dalits = +10
The Flynn for Africa = +10Future Indian IQ
Southern Brahmin, 1% @ 125 IQ
Northern Brahmin, 4% @ 120 IQ
Southern Merchant, 3% @ 115 IQ
Northern Merchant, 12% @ 110 IQ
Southern Peasant, 8% @ 100 IQ
Northern Peasant, 32% @ 95 IQ
Muslim, 15% @ 85 iQ
Southern Dalit, 5% @ 85 IQ
Northern Dalit, 20% @ 80IQAvg = 94
After Flynn
High End Indian IQ
Over 120 IQ = 55 mil
Over 130 IQ = 20 mil
Over 140 IQ = 5 mil
I certainly can't comment on the validity of the empirical details that underlie this model -- India being so complicated -- but the general approach seems not unreasonable to me. The point is to put a framework out there for the public to consider.
One potential problem that jumps out at me with Rec1Man's approach, though, is the potential for disparate fertility interfering with improving environmental conditions. Are fertility rates the same across all groups, or are lower IQ groups growing faster? The Bombay Parsis, who were the most affluent and educated group in India for much of the 20th century, are said to be imploding demographically. If IQ, education, and declining fertility are correlated, then dysgenic / dyscultural effects could undermine some of the gains from an improved environment.
Granted, we haven't seen much hard evidence of a dysgenic / dyscultural relative effect yet. But, then, we haven't seen much hard evidence of a positive Flynn relative effect. We've seen lots of evidence of an absolute Flynn effect, but little evidence of countries shifting relative average IQs, as I documented here. We've probably seen more evidence of relative changes in height than relative changes in IQ.
My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer
Posts
244 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 244 of 244The other post has a good source of SIB last names. Any suggestions on how to find a list of Ashkenazi last names?
rec1man: those x-posts regarding the demonization that brahmins have been subject to are instructive. Also very counter-intuitive is the fact that the majority of brahmins are very poor, thanks in part to AA.
anon: skin color per se cannot be definitive in regards to european or central asian admixture. only a genetic analysis can be conclusive and that is in early stages. as you say the range of skin tones can be extreme, from southern european tones to the "jet black" tones (certainly darker than the average african american tones)in my extended family.
the head of IBM India (a SIB) had his genetic analysis done (his wife who is a relative of mine is dark complexioned and pretty and has a PhD in genetics to boot)
--
Shanker Annaswamy was born in Guntur in the southern Indian state of Andhra Pradhesh. He was raised in Chennai (formerly called Madras) in the state of Tamil Nadu, also in southern India.
He can trace his genealogy back only to his great-grandfathers on both sides of his family.
“My father's side of the family hailed from the southern city called Tirunelveli (Tamil Nadu state) and more precisely from village called Arumugamangalam,” said Shanker. “I’ve visited this village, and there are hardly any of my relatives still living there. Most of them seem to have moved to more metropolitan areas of India. My grandfather was a lawyer in Madras.
“My mother's side family hailed from a town called Mayavaram (Tamil Nadu state). Similarly those families later migrated to bigger metropolitan areas. My grandfather was a civil engineer.”
Shanker’s DNA matches that of Haplogroup R1A, a group that scientists believe probably formed in what is now Pakistan and northern India about 30,000 years ago. About 20 percent of the men in India are in Haplogroup R1A.
But Shanker probably has many distant relations in Europe as well. For example, R1A is the predominate type of DNA found in Poland. Geneticists believe that the group spread westward from India in an arc that went through central Asia to Russia and as far west as eastern Germany.
That connection to Poland and how people from India could have moved to Eastern Europe surprised Shanker when he saw his Genographic Project results.
“This kind of scientific work will bring the world together and narrow the differences that arise due to location and geographic boundaries,” he said.
---
rec1man: those x-posts regarding the demonization that brahmins have been subject to are instructive. Also very counter-intuitive and not well known is the fact that the majority of brahmins are very poor, thanks in part to AA.
anon: skin color per se cannot be definitive in regards to european or central asian admixture. only a genetic analysis can be conclusive and that is in early stages.
as you say the range of skin tones can be extreme, from southern european tones to the "jet black" tones (certainly darker than the average african american tones)in my extended family.
the head of IBM India (a SIB) had his genetic analysis done (his wife who is a relative of mine is dark complexioned and pretty and has a PhD in genetics to boot)
--
Shanker Annaswamy was born in Guntur in the southern Indian state of Andhra Pradhesh. He was raised in Chennai (formerly called Madras) in the state of Tamil Nadu, also in southern India.
He can trace his genealogy back only to his great-grandfathers on both sides of his family.
“My father's side of the family hailed from the southern city called Tirunelveli (Tamil Nadu state) and more precisely from village called Arumugamangalam,” said Shanker. “I’ve visited this village, and there are hardly any of my relatives still living there. Most of them seem to have moved to more metropolitan areas of India. My grandfather was a lawyer in Madras.
“My mother's side family hailed from a town called Mayavaram (Tamil Nadu state). Similarly those families later migrated to bigger metropolitan areas. My grandfather was a civil engineer.”
Shanker’s DNA matches that of Haplogroup R1A, a group that scientists believe probably formed in what is now Pakistan and northern India about 30,000 years ago. About 20 percent of the men in India are in Haplogroup R1A.
But Shanker probably has many distant relations in Europe as well. For example, R1A is the predominate type of DNA found in Poland. Geneticists believe that the group spread westward from India in an arc that went through central Asia to Russia and as far west as eastern Germany.
That connection to Poland and how people from India could have moved to Eastern Europe surprised Shanker when he saw his Genographic Project results.
“This kind of scientific work will bring the world together and narrow the differences that arise due to location and geographic boundaries,” he said.
---
In my own family, I have aunts who have skin as dark as africans and aunts whose skin is as light as greeks or italians
The average SIB
is roughly midway in color between north indians and south indians but facially he can easily be distinguished from equally dark or darker tamils
While some SIBs are very fair, and some very dark, most are mid-color and can be distinguished from the native tamil population by lighter skin, more caucasoid facial features, mixing the local language with sanskrit, method of dress, and so on
While all SIBs trace ancestry from north India, in the past some hypergamy was allowed in limited cases and in every region the brahmins represent a blend between the locals and north indians
There are even brahmins in Thailand who look thai, since they have married thai women for over 1000 years
As far as Nairs go
They had a matriarchal society in kerala and the women had a series of 1 year marraiges
Often their temperory husbands were younger sons of kerala brahmins
This went on for over a 1000 years
So the nairs eventually are now indistinguishable from SIBs both in looks and very near SIBs in IQ
Some nairs have skin the tone of italians and greeks
The maharajas of kerala were nairs
and many of them invited distinguished brahmins to be the temperory husbands of their daughters
with the result, the elite nair sub-castes are virtually completely SIB
An example of current anti-hindu pamphlets being spread out by missionaries with western funds
How can the missionaries who are addicted to funds from western tithing tell their masters in the west, that in India, the public in general outsources religion to the brahmins
and the brahmin IQ runs into the jewish range and the whole endeavour is as fruitless as trying to convert the jews
Sure they can get some poor dalits to convert, but thats about it
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haqeeqat_(book)
Haqeeqat (book)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Haqeeqat (हक़ीक़त, meaning reality) is the Hindi translation of a controversial book by a Kerala-based Christian evangelist M.G. Mathew. It was translated by Daniel Nathaniel associated with Emmanuel Mission International (EMI).The book is widely regarded as an anti-Hindu book [1][2][3]
The Government of Rajasthan received complaints about the book that it ridicules Hindu and Jain deities and beliefs. After examining the contents of the controversial book, the government decided to ban it, as it felt that it may incite communal violence.
EMI's founder, Archbishop M.A. Thomas and his son, the Rev. Dr. Samuel Thomas, went in hiding as the police searched for them [
Hopegivers International, one of the largest Christian ministries in India has approached US State Department, US senators, and Christian friends in Washington DC, after Dr. Samuel Thomas’s arrest on March 16. [5]
Kanchan Gupta, quotes the particularly offensive parts of the book in The Pioneer:
How could Arya Hindus bring Aryanisation on this earth. To be Arya, one has to be born of an Arya womb... If Arya Hindus want to bring Aryanisation then they must lend or rent out all Arya wombs to non-Aryans. Non-Aryans should be given Brahmin women so that children are born from Brahmin womb" (Page 182-183).
US negotiators say it loudly that the one of the hardest nuts to crack in the trade and other international agreements, WTO etc, is India
This is kind of what happens
During these international negotiations
The Indian legation consists of Northern Merchants the Vinod Khosla types and SIBs as the back up crew
The Merchants haggle like crazy over the big issues and then when an aggreement is reached on the big issues the treaty is given over to the back office types to put in the fine print
Here is where the SIB comes into play. Short, dark, geeky, with glasses, he is grossly underestimated by his second tier competition
The SIB slips in every escape loophole, very fuzzy definition, complex paragraphs with lots of grey areas, every waiver, every exception possible
"Geneticists believe that the group spread westward from India in an arc that went through central Asia to Russia and as far west as eastern Germany."
I think it would be the other way around. The variation in phenotypes as far as physical characteristics are concerned is greater in South Asia than Europe.
Maybe india was a locus of differentiation? I kid.
rec1man here
---
Reasons for western ignorance of IQ of upper castes
*An atrociously annoying post showing the insecure ethnocentric you are. EVERY statement you made was unsupported and has a more realistic unflattering answer.
Indian atomic team for the 1974
Smiling Buddha, Indian nuclear tests
BARC Team Lead: Raja Ramanna,
( Southern Brahmin )
Director of BARC
Team Second-in-Command: P.K. Iyengar
( Southern Brahmin )
(responsible for the actual manufacture of the device)
* Nuclear System Design Team
o Team lead: Rajagopala Chidambaram
( Southern Brahmin )
o Satinder Kumar Sikka
( Northern Merchant )
* Electronic Detonation System Team
o Team lead: Pranab Rebatiranjan Dastidar
( Northern Brahmin)
o Sekharipuram Narayana Aiyer Seshadri
( Southern Brahmin)
* Neutron Initiator Team
o Vasudev K. Iya
( Southern Brahmin)
o T.S. Murthy
( Southern Brahmin)
o C.V. Sundaram
( Southern Brahmin)
* Plutonium Core Fabrication Team
o Team lead: P.R. Roy
( Northern Merchant )
* System Integration Team
o Team lead: Jitendra Nath Soni
( Northern Merchant )
o Anil Kakodkar
( Southern Brahmin) ( also current head of India nuke program )
There is a big problem with this article. The average IQ of Indian people in 2100 is already known!!!
It is sure to be 100. There is no other possibility.
IQ is a measure of the intelligence of a person relative to others of their group where the average is given a value of 100 and a certain standar deviation is used.
I don't know about the model posted.
However, there must be some huge discrepancy btwn the data posted in the bell curve and the actual average iq of the indian people, genotype potential. Some 75-80 % of indians are living on less than $2.00. Hardly enough to ensure proper nutrition. And there is only 60-80 million in the indian middle class, not the purported 300 million. So I would expect some rise over the next 100-200 years: just like africans in America now differ from their native counterparts by 12-15 points. The extent of the rise is debatable. Ancient india did have some interesting thinkers, and 19th century india gave birth to the famed ramanujan. also the numbers might be skewed due the population boom at the lower end since 1960.
rec1man is pathetic. Pulling random articles as facts. Citing rediff articles makes you a moron.
Nobody here seems to dispute IQ as the start and end of defining people.
Let me use a circular logic like rec1man. If brahmins are so smart, why havent they been successful in India, if you cite quotas, that goes to show you are not smart enough to change the law. If you cant change the law in a democracy the brahmin group is probably dumb. Solving equations doesn't maketh a man. And the chadrayaan Annadurai wasn't a brahmin, dont start pulling random articles saying brahmins are successful, for every brahmin I can pull 10 people from some other random group. That doesnt mean one is better than the other. Again marks dont maketh a man. You are going about the wrong way.
Why hasnt India been successful if they have x number of whatever, because the underlying mentality that "I am better than others" and "making sure others dont succeed", except in the case of gujaratis.
The IQ tests will probably show a tribe in Africa as dumb but that doesnt mean they have failed as a person. And rec1man, your logiv is why many people in India hate brahmins.
quite silly stuff, many caste groupings are actually quite recent - many dalit or "backward" groups have distinguished lineages and history of accomplishment. So called "forward groups/clans" often turn out to be groups that were able to take advantage of trade or education in the last 100 years. So there is no basis for thinking of these distinctions as very long-lived or that different groups cannot change very rapidly.
To my mind a lot of this analysis is reminiscent of british colonial theorizing about indians. Instead of focusing on the simple fact that indians had 5% literacy in 1900 - as well as the complete absence of a modern economy, in part a feature of colonialism - they focused on hinduism as paganism, inherent bloodthirstiness of indians, oriental indiscipline and so on.
The current analysis is much more "respectable" but fundamentally doesnt differ very much from these more traditional forms of goofiness.
What's funnier is Recman1's emphasized association of caucasian facial features and lighter skin relative to the locals with higher intelligence.
The previous poster's (2posts or so back) highlights how foolish such circular logic can be...
He also seriously underestimates how much the Brahmins have mingled with the rest of their particular ethnic/linguistic group and how this brings into question the notion that there has been extensive and long-term selection on them as a relatively non-porous population.
There is a partial genetic basis for intelligence, except it's most likely subservient to environmental influences. Furthermore IQ tests aren't going to be anywhere equivalent to testing for a whole suite of genetic traits (that might be found to correlate with superior cognitive function in the future)
"The mixed breed Anglo-Indians were the product of Dalit women and the british"this is universal. Substitute "änglo" by any nationality that is not mine, substitute "indians" by "my nationality" and substitute "dalit women" for "slut" and we have the universal thesis of men whose culture is losing women to another culture/ethnicity.
Only two features can make that argument true:
-High Testosterone among men. It is pretty obvious that the same factors that increased the IQ must have reduced the testosterone in India. So english men were more manly. Period.
- societal shaming for dating foreigners. This doesn't make sense since India was ruled by the british. So the societal shame came from the british themselves, against mixed race children.
If social consciousness and social intelligence and included in the IQ test, upper caste Indians especially will score, probably about 50 :)
I think we all are barking on the wrong tree. Let me explain.
I have worked with people from different geographies and from social strata across India. I will readily accept that SIB’s as a group are quicker than their fellow countrymen. Rec1man may have a point after all.
Still, I find that SIB's have diminished ability to manage chaos. I don’t find them in politics. There are hardly any entrepreneurs (I’ll address the exception of IT entrepreneurs later).
You find many SIB academicians, top managers and administrators, but hardly any entrepreneurs and politicians. You find so many SIB’s wanting to get into technical (engineering, medical) collages as against law or business administration. It is true that Silicon Valley is full of SIB’s. But most of them are technology tracks.
The only answer that I know that can explain this paradox is ATTENTION
IQ measures someone’s ability to identify patterns from sequences (read this book: http://www.amazon.com/Intelligence-Jeff-Hawkins/dp/0805078533/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1252248115&sr=8-1). Attention is the individual’s ability to hold one’s mind on the task with sufficient intensity.
If IQ were a gun, attention would be the aim.
Like IQ of each people varies, an attention capability of people varies as well. Only, we don’t have a way of measuring attention. Heck, we don’t even have a decent name for “attention capability”. And I certainly don’t know of any good book on attention that I can refer you to. But this book would do some justice: http://www.amazon.com/New-Executive-Brain-Frontal-Complex/dp/0195329406/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1252250944&sr=8-2
A shooter with better aim, standing on a stable platform, given plenty of time and peace to take his aim, can do a lot of damage even with a musket. This doesn’t necessarily mean that the gun is superior.
Good aim needs a stable platform. If a shooter wins his/her battle with their superior aim, they are uncomfortable in ever changing environment. This, I suspect, is the case with SIB’s.
People with better attention system are good in details, good with planning skills, good at organizing, have a good sense of time and don’t mind handling repetitive tasks. On the other hand, they are poor with big picture, low on empathy, need order to survive and they loath chaos. I have observed all these traits in SIB’s. These traits sit well with their job profiles.
I also think that attention plays a large part in getting selected into IIT’s. This might explain how they (and SIB’s) perform poorly in dealing with undefined or open ended problems (like business), but do well with problems where their superior attention can be used as competitive advantage (like JEE, GRE, technology research, etc.).
Having said that, I predict that you will see more SIB entrepreneurs where new technology (or change in business environment) brings in more order. Can I give you an example? Think IT!
I am from East India and from a brahman family.I have to say that this does not look like anything other than a modern Indian racist thread where some SIB is trying to glorify themselves as the best race in the world.It's just as bad as lynn's work.Perhaps worse,as the stats are self-calculated and on who knows on what basis.There is absoulutely no reliable source.And some of the stats ,I know them to be wrong.For example there are plenty of Northern Brahmins in USA.
There are so many assumptions made here that doesn't make any sense.
1>It assumes that genes are a much more important part than environment.It is well proven that environment,food and parenting plays a very important role in the development of IQ.
2>It assumes that IQ gives a true measure of Intelligence.At present,we don't even know what intelligence is.
3>It assumes that elites are elites because they have better IQ genes.This is not exactly true or verified.Specially the genetic part.Also,elites may not necessarily have a higher IQ.Most of their IQs were never tested.Feynman had an IQ of 122 only.Einstein failed in several entrance exams.
4>It assumes that each individual cast is just as far away from reaching their true potential as SIBs are.So add 5 points to each class in the future.This agains is ridiculous.I know SIBs very well and they are very disciplined,hard-working and more motivated to gain a high Socio-Economic-Status(SES).I am pretty sure that as India's ecomonic growth booms and the social-motivations rise,SIBs will not be the ones to benefit the most.
5>It also makes a north-south divide based on islamic massacres.Why?Because he thinks that elite genes were destroyed.I tell you what-the truely high IQs will find a way to escape.It's the lower IQs that will fall victim-elite or not.So perhaps the massacre enriched North?
Next I give it to you that there are 2 people in south who the north hasn't been able to match in their respective fields.They are S.Ramanujan and V.Anand.It may only be a mtter of time and only time will tell.
BUT for pretty much every other area of intellect,there is more than a match in the northern regions(epecially the eastern regions like Bengal).Don't bring nobel prize in science here,because many times the better works don't get Nobel.(relativity never got nobel,stephen hawking never got one)
I am sure that the Bose-Einstein condensate plays a much more fundamental role in physics compared to Raman effect,which got the.
Also,undoubtedly,it's the better part of SIBs that get to the US.And they get a lot of oppportunity to prove themselves there.
Another thing is that being an Indian,I know that surnames can be poor indicators of caste or location.
For example,Karmakar can be both bengali and marathi.
In bengal,Roy,Ray,Choudhury,Sarkar can be both brahmin And non-brahmin.
And Brahmins do marry other castes,although that's a minority case.
To point some other mistakes :
1>Anil Kakodkar ,the nuclear scientist cited as a SIB here, is not an SIB.He is from MP.There are probably other mistakes too that I did not try to verify.
2>The average IQ of the jews was actually lower at the beginning of the century than other Europeans.It's only recently that jews have surpassed the northern Europens.So the IQ of groups can change RELATIVELY over time.
3>Mixed breeds are technically MORE evolved as they have greater variety of genes in them.
4>The IQ of even identical twins vary by as much as 6 points on the average.Not only that, there are identical twins where the IQ difference is measured to be 25 points.And that much from a study of only 300 ITwins.So genes are far from being the ultimate predictors.
5>It is scientifically proven that certain kinds of brain games can increase even FLUID intelligence in ADULTS.And no upper limit has been found to such increases.So IQ is far from being fixed even in adults.
6>On the average there are more bengalis in IMO,than south Indians.
7>Practice-time, Motivation,Discipline, and emotional factors are usually much better predictors of successs than IQ.
The author practically cherry picks a few areas where the south Indians have had a lot of success in the past(Number Theory(Ramanujan),Chess(Anand),Nuclear Science) and completely ignores any other area where northerners might have excelled.
The reason why china has a higher IQ than India is because of enriched envorinment.Why is there more enriched environment in the east?Because of better economy,better educational system and more ambitious attitude.
And may be,food-habbits play a role too.
The Indians need to be more ambitious ,and that's the first thing.When I see Indians ,the first thing that I see is a haapy-go-lucky attitude.Very few have Sky high dreams.
wow, rec1man convinced me of the mental superiority of the indians
holy crap dude, you guys are SMRT!!
but really, god damn.
1. Brahmin
2. Merchant,
3. Peasant,
4.1 Dalit ("Untouchable")
4.2 Scheduled Caste
4.3 Low caste converts to Islam
That classification is atleast 100 years old and doesnt exist anymore since 1947. Brahmins are no more considered superior, you can find them mostly in temples or cleaning toilets.
Recman1,
Kayasthas as 'merchants' is laughable. It is a saying that Kayasthas can never be merchants because its not in their blood. They're indeed very bad at businesses.
Kayasthas are an intellectual and a spiritual caste -- at par with the Brahmins, at least in deed. Indeed, Kayasthas not only originated from the Brahmins (it were a section of the Brahmins who took over writing as a profession in the ancient times), Kayasthas are also known as half-Brahmins.
Indeed, Kayasthas are at par with Brahmins both at intellectual pursuits and spirituality, with several Kayastha scholars, novelists, spiritual leaders, etc., more than any other class or caste in India.
I do agree with the author's claim that SIB's have an extremely high average IQ. I don't really have any concrete data, so i should perhaps STFU, but I'm going to venture forth and attest to their intelligence since my background is a Tamil Forward Caste family with a lot of SIB friends(this might of-course bias my opinion, so do take my thoughts with a grain of salt).
During my schooling I did notice how well these Tamil Brahmin kids do well academically. The top grades were almost always taken by an SIB, it was ridiculous. Granted, a lot of them worked hard, since SIB families push their children academically but even the ones who were pretty laid-back did very well compared to the gang of their laid-back peers. Of course this is just an observation of a small testset, without any analysis of how hard these kids worked at home,etc. but TBH, in my home town this discussion would be considered pointless since SIB's are simply acknowledged as being smart.
I'm surprised no one has mentioned Ramanujam so far, often seen as one of the most gifted mathematicians.
A.R Rahman, the famous composer was also SIB by birth, although his family converted to Islam when he was young. Not to mention that SIB's created "Carnatic music" whose systematic analysis and musical complexity rivals and perhaps even surpasses modern western classical music. For a group whose population is barely 2M in the state of tamil nadu, they have already left a big impact - easily explained by their very high intelligence.
Brahmins traditionally have been a spiritual group and in the past SIB's have underperformed in respect of material performance, since their culture prohibits material aggrandization; materialism being seen as being detrimantal to spiritual growth and men were encouraged to give up all their wealth every 5 years. They could perhaps afford to do this, since they anyway enjoyed high cultural capital and perhaps it was a status boosting measure to discard the one item everyone else absolutely needed. I do wonder why a smart bunch of people placed so much emphasis on living a simple life, but Einstein's quote does come to mind - "Any intelligent fool can make things bigger and more complex... It takes a touch of genius - and a lot of courage to move in the opposite direction."
Just to put on record'...i was here, and more out of curiosity to know how did Dr Richard Lynn get that score of 81 for India's Avg IQ!!? Well , I am not as much averse to his reasoning, but neither with him.
This post saw a very good and interesting debate, much before i had even made an access to the Lynn's fact. Nice read.
Hello Steve,
I went through quite many comments, especiallly those of rec1man. and here is what i had to say.
Dr Lynn's figures are based on some old time studies/data. How much IQ should one expect for India in modern, post-IT revolution days, is yet to be seen. As for those days bygone, I can see the arguments to be revolving around the Social and Geographical divide across India. Somehow I feel it is a good observation to rate south Indians on an average little less than north Indians, although the strong overlaps exist whereby best of the south indian brahmins maybe much ahead of many many north Indians. The brahmins have been treated as the postive correction factors for the IQ score, while the backwards and dalits are shown to be surplus in population, as also low in their IQ.
I would want to suggest that While studying about India, it is important to understand the role of Brahmins in the society. Indian community and religion has strong dependence and dominance on this one particular 'caste'. I have a personal feeling that the Mulims and the British faltered at this point when they appreciated the Brahmins as a caste. It is one place where the mistake that they created also went on to change the social structure of India..and for a very very long time.
The cause for the mistake, i think lies in the point that some intricate knowledge of Vedic Dharma had to be maintained by the observer to exactly understand what was a caste. Brahmin, by some Vedic belief, was a status accorded to a person who a acquired certain bit of understanding about the conceptual thing called Brahma. Brahma can be understood as the general prudence, foresightfulness, that a traveller needs to have while doing his journey, ..over here the journey refering to 'journey of life'. Brahma was also associated with humderstanding of human behavoiur-- the psychology, and effects on destiny(destiny again implying a future event; )connection of Pain with our emotions.,... bla bla.
Important is to note that Brahmin status, thus, went to the one who had a good conceptual mind to undertsand this Arts related subjects.
Further, Brahmin status required acquisition of Knowledge of Vedas because Vedas were supposedly the repository for all such old acquisitions.
The Vedic dharma, in itself, does not have any Universal definitino f Good and bad. therefore, the understanding of Ethics is heavily required to learn , on a case-by-case basis, what is good and what is bad. The brahmins had a role to play , whereby they judges the Karma , deeds and actions, to declare good and bad. This was the role-- for fortune-telling, future-telling, and deciding on one's actions social acceptance.
In himself, the status of Brahmin was accorded to person belonging to any caste! STEVE, this is important , because, if genetical causes of IQ are being searched, then, by taking this proposition, u can notice that a High IQ can be expected from person of any caste, not just the brahmins,because Brahmins in themselves came from all the castes .
However, Brahmins later in time manipulated to give themselves also a Caste- form. But the Vedic source has never shown the origin of Brahmins as caste..nowhere, as far as I understand. The latter day Brahmins attempted to put themselves as sons of Brahma, the god, but the Vedic source claims the Manu was Brahma's son, and entire caste and mankind came from him! Thus everybody was entitled to hold the Brahmin status.
Even today, the brahmin surnames can reveal the Status-level acquired by their ancestors, but may not necessarily emphasis that high IQ be associated with them. Other way, a person, so called from low status, can also show a high IQ, possible because his high IQ ancestor had migrated into the Brahmin club, but the gene of same family might have travelled to this low caste, high IQ person.
Mannu,
Thanks,
Steve
Ok, I came across this because I was wondering who in the world would be able to challenge China in the future (I could only think of India and was hoping for some good stats). However, there are things I do not understand about the stats and the separation by caste in India.
There is talk about a "Darwinian" pressure that has supported higher IQ in the Brahmin class. However, historically, how was the caste system created to begin with? For example, was the untouchable group created because they were simply uneducated and treated like dirt due to lack of merit? Or were they conquered peoples who were simply unfortunate enough to have lost a war? Once you are labelled as an untouchable, CAN you move out? (i don't think you can) Therefore, if the untouchables were a conquered peoples, then anyone who happened to have had a high IQ when conquered would not have the opportunity to move out of such an unfortunate caste (since the society would not allow you to move up). Therefore, any genetic potential for a high IQ should have remained relatively intact within the caste, assuming those with talent did not have the opportunity to leave the caste anyway there should not have been a deterioration in the genetic potential of the group (of course assuming that there were individuals of high intellect in that general group to begin with). If this is the case, then with nutrition they should be able to move back up to average in the very long term, and the underestimation of their potential may be too extreme.
Conversely, what about the higher classes? Other than birth, and consistent marriage into other families of the same class, were there any other real requirements? What if you were born into teh Brahmin, but did not do well in reading, would you be weeded out? Or once born a Brahmin, always a Brahmin? It seems like a lot of those labelled "Brahmin" aren't religious figures anymore. When did this happen?
Basically I'm asking about the basis of the Darwinian pressure and to what degree the caste would develop according to that pressure.
Another question I have is with regards to the significance of the separation. I am the same anonymous that was asking about Darwinian pressure in the development of the caste system. I have a further curiosity. What is the significance of the separation by caste and the associated IQ?
IF the caste system was created through Darwinian pressure that has made the Brahmin more intelligent on average than other Indians, is this really significant at all really? For example, Southern Brahmin here are set at an IQ of 120, with a 1% representation in the population. Considering that the top 1% of the world generally has an IQ of 135, if the Brahmin generally are in the top 5% of India because of how the society developed, then an average around 115-120 would not be hard to believe. BUT, what is the significance of this? So there is a group of people in India that represent the elite of Indian society (making up a mere 5% of their society) who have an average IQ of 120. What does this mean for India's future? How is the question of India's future, as measured by IQ, affected by this revelation? People in the top 5% of any nation with an average IQ of 100 will have IQ's over 120 anyway, so does it matter if you are part of a special caste or not?
What I would be more interested in is HOW many people of an IQ over 130 is in existence in India today, regardless of caste. THAT will measure India's future more correctly than trying to separate the Indian people into castes and then estimating their worth. The Brahmin are probably among the top educated in India, and they make up 5% of India, BUT the top 5% of a nation with an IQ of 100 has a minimum IQ of 125 anyway. So though India has the Brahmin, another country like China has random people in their top 5% of their nation that can surpass that caste anyawy.
I am less interested in the caste system and the IQ of those in each caste and more interested in HOW MANY highly intelligent people are available as human resources for the development of the Indian nation. I don't think it matters what caste you are in, so long as you have a high IQ you are valuable as a potential academic, researcher, engineer, politician etc... I personally think the nation with the largest amount of high IQ individuals generally will win the race.
Dear Anonymous:
That's the big question: How smart are Indians on average (both currently and under ideal environmental conditions)? How much is high intelligence restricted to some subgroups and how much is it widespread throughout the population?
I am starting to think certain haplogroups that form a higher proportion of populations might be contributing to intelligence levels. If you look at the brahmins, a high proportion of males seem to be R1a, R2 and J2 y dna. J2 originated in middle east and has been recognized as a marker that gave way to the spread of agriculture from Middle East. I believe males who ultimately became successful farmers were more intelligent, had more resources which women were more attracted to and probably had more children. J2 has a higher concentration in southern india compared to northern india. It is also quite high in askhenazi Jews and people from northern middle east. I am not sure what ethnicities contribute to extremely high intelligence socities. I have always heard there were high percentages of Askhenazi Jews. I believe certain genes that are passed on by men carrying R1, J2, O y dna contribute to intelligence. Lot of research has to be done to figure out what genes are contributing to intelligence, which is just a waste of time as everyone is just looking for an upper hand in this competitive world.
India was the most technologically advanced nation, along side China for a long time, thus it is evident, in the future, with improvements in education,prenatal care, nutrition, sanitation and living standards, that the IQ of 85-86.5 for India's impoverished masses can be equal to the Chinese or at least closer to the IQ of 100. What we do know, is that lower caste people, who were sent over to Britain, score 83 in the first generation, but the Flynn Effect rises their IQ scores up to 97. Thus it is safe to assume, that the Indian IQ of the lower caste is somewhere in the vicinity of 97. Due to the Overepresentation of UK Indians in many high IQ positions, there seems to be alot of variance with the IQ of 97, so it is safe to say that Indians score in the UK, in the second generation or so, at 97-112. Lets not forget the Flynn Effect will probably raise that 97 IQ higher.
what about east and west part of india? specially west bengal-which has produced 2 greatest scientist from all of east(INCLUDING ASIA AND AUSTRALIA)-sir jagadish bose,sn bose,the best structural engineer of 20th century fazlur khan.
or what about marathi,also what is the iq of marwari and gujrati business tycoon?
Here is a masterpiece.. from a self praising SIB Brahmin (rec1man). This junk is laughable at best. Such people bring Indian IQ into question.
This rubbish below is without any base at all.
1% Southern Brahmin @ 113
4% Northern Brahmin @ 108
3% Southern Merchant @ 105
12% Northern Merchant @ 102
40% Peasant @ 88
40% Dalit @ 75
Even letting such things get published on a free for all blog is a crime. It would reduce employment opportunities for groups adversely represented.
There is no sample, no data, no survey for absurd figures.
There is a lot of corruption in admission India even at IIT/AIIMS. A lot of groups mentioned above who happen to belong to influential families get through by somebody else writing exams or unfair help of coaching institutes. Such cases may actually form a majority of all admits.
Uttar Pradesh and Bihar are two states with indicators (poverty, malnutrition, violence, child mortality, illiteracy) worse than subsaharan africa. So these states must have africa like IQ of 65 or 70. And these states are teeming with NIB/Merchant...whatever you call them. So average IQ of these NIB/Merchant etc must be in the same range 70. My feeling is that a suitable survey and validated statistical model will bring out the true IQs which are around 40 points below what is claimed. A huge fraction of population >105 level if true as claimed would result in these states have much better economic indicators.
Another problem with is quality of universities. The top institutes and faculty at top institutes are not comparable with even the third tier US universities (state universities). Therefore, by virtue of the excellent training even at lower ranked US universities, a US student with IQ of 110 performs better than an Indian with IQ 160. If Indian IQ is to be of any use corruption in admission at IIT/NIT through coaching institutes and poor quality of faculty should be adressed.
Steve Sailer,
You have taken bits from different websites and trying to pass yourself off as pseudo-intellectual. You don't know next to nothing about India. You probably came across someone's website where they suggested Muslims had low IQ and were low caste Hindu converts. Nothing could be further from truth.
Muslims converted from all castes. In fact, in order to avoid the large taxes imposed on Hindus of the day, many of them converted to Islam. Muslims were converts from all castes. There is in fact a recent study done on this.
If Muslims converted from lower castes only, why would Pakistan and Bangladesh have the same IQ as India?
Another thing to remember is, Muslims had been coming to the Indian Subcontinent from West Asia in a steady stream between 12th and 18th Centuries, so 6 or 7 centuries. In all cases they came without women. Do you seriously think they lived out a a life of celibacy and that some of them not married local women in the Subcontinent.
Another ting to note, Muslims in general (I say general, not true for everyone) tend to be lighter skinned than their Hindu counterparts in any region. The only people who match them are Brahmins. This should give us some indication that they came from all castes and very likely have some direct West Asian admixture.
As a side note, I don't think Indian Brahmins are particularly brilliant. Some exceptions of course. Indians abroad have a very strong worth ethic and become slaves to their line of education or career. Sure, they are more intelligent than Europeans generally but only a bit.
Regarding Jewish IQ, its interesting that Jews in Israel score in the low 90s and yet the Ashkenazim in the US score 105 or so. So what are we to assume from this? That Ashkenazi derive their intelligence from European admixture (let's face it, many Ashkenazi look more European than they do Middle Eastern). Sometimes when a group gets persecuted it can lead them to achieve greater things than they would otherwise be capable. Jews are a persecuted group so feel the need to achieve in order to be accepted or even 'feel' superior over groups who carried out the persecutions. So the victim mentality actually pushes them to greater things. Also, its no coincidence that Jews often buy themselves awards and prizes. take Hollywood, for example. They make up a tiny number there but win all acting and directing awards. They give each other top media executive jobs. The same holds true for other groups. Take Silicon Valley. Now that Indians have made a dent there, there is no doubt in my mind they have a natural tendency to hire other Indians more than other groups. Its a natural human trait to group with the people most like us.
You probably won't approve my comment, but there you go.
Bhavik - student of architecture
Thesis has done on critical regionalism
ANOTHER CRITICAL FACTORE IS LANGUAGE
India is share 4 language family
Indo-aryan (hindi, gujarati, punjabi, etc...)
Dravidian (tamil, malayalam, kannad,...)
Austro-asiatic (very few...almost nigligible compare to population)
Tibeto - burman
One of the Well known anthropologist:
Language's structure plays major roll in the development of mind (as we speak, write, and listen)
Guide and me: most of the indian speak 3 language (hindi, english, and regional (ex: telugu, kanand, gujarati, punjabi...etc total 21
Another well known anthropologist:
A person who knows three language for communication, have inherantly ability of critical thinking...
Guide : so most of the indian have ability of critical thinking inherantly
Me: south indian knowns (3)
dravidian (regional language)
Hindi (indo aryan)
English (international also acceoted by india as administative)
While north indian (2)
Guj, punjabi, kashmiri (indo -aryan- regional)
Hindi (nationaly spoken but also indo - aryan)
Engish (same as above)
So...most of the indians has basic knowledge of 3 language...being part of india (hindi)and education (degree - english) + regional
In which north indians are also same but they are part of 2 language family (hindi is as same as guj, pun, rajasthani at strucre level - minor difference at final script, speking - much much same)
While south indian are among the one who
Are part of 3 language family
(Regional, english and hindi- (I know they reject to speak but still being part of india they known it very well just ignore in favor of regional language to avoid hegemony bcoz todays internet, movies bollywood, tv news etc so they known
So u can see clearly why they reject hindi bcoz of it feel him complete allien due to language structure)
This may be reason for higher litaracy ratio in south than others
This may be reason for higher IQ
I rest my argument
"Another ting to note, Muslims in general (I say general, not true for everyone) tend to be lighter skinned than their Hindu counterparts in any region. The only people who match them are Brahmins.'
Sad to read stuff like this. There are lots of black and short muslims as well as brahmins teeming with australoid blood in India. The color varies from region to region with all people from north being a bit lighter than those form south. It is very often to find an untouchable much lighter and well built than a muslim or a brahmin.
This whole, thing that Brahmins are a super race is laughable and opposite of truth.
The British found that the brahmin convicts were more than their percentage in population. There is further data that in Bihar, the poorest state, Brahmins with 5-6% population account for 50% crimes (such as rape, murder) against poor. The Indian states with highest concentration of brahmins are abjectly poor while those with a very small number of them do very well.
Based of this data I can say Brahmins must have very low IQ. may be 70-75. Out of their large population of 60 - 70 millions, if there are a few, single digit south indian or Bengali smart brahmins that doesnot change the picture.
This whole, thing that Brahmins are a super race is laughable and opposite of truth.
The british found that the brahmin convicts were more than their percentage. There is further data that in Bihar, the poorest state, Brahmins with 5-6% population account for 50% crimes (such as reape, marder) against poor. The states with highest concentration of brahmins are abjectly poor while those with a very small number of them do very well.
Based of this data I can say Brahmins must have very low IQ. masy be 70-75. Out of their large population, if there are a few, single digit south indian smart brahmins that doesnot change the picture.
There is further evidence for brahmin iq being as low as 75 i.e. pisa test results where most test takers were brahmin students. Students of other castes were not allowed to participate. The result of pisa test was an iq of 75 for india which is essentially brahmin iq.
One reason , muslim having low iq as they follow incest
One reason behind low iq in muslims as they follow incest
Your IQ estimates of population in India are slightly inaccurate. Here is an answer why:
Brahmins are with a IQ of 113 or higher depending on the diet of their earlier childhood. Most Brahmins can be found between IQ range of 112 to 126. I would say that Brahmins are somewhat similar in cognitive abilities and intelligence compared to western and central Europeans but Europeans have "better" memory and greater ability to think of lot of details when memorizing or calculating because their brains are actually bigger in size.I personally think although ability to memorize or calculate might be the same among different Y-DNA halogroups of Humans (R,I,J,G,N,O,H,K) who are spread across different geographical regions or countries, their technique of solving problems seems to be directly related to their brain size which is obviously greater in central,western and northern Europeans.
The lower order in India also called OBC, SC, ST form the lower end of IQ of world's population with IQ anywhere between 75 to 100. These people are more in number and are multiplying exponentially every minute. These lower order seem to believe that they can just live by consuming raw materials of a country making use of people with superior brains such as those of Europeans and Brahmins in India. They may pretend that they are smart but they actually give up when presented with hard problems. It's actually true that brain size is a important criteria in judging a human's ability to create, imagine and invent tools or machinery to increase the progress of any civilization.
Thank you for your article.
Post a Comment