The Instigator
someloser
Pro (for)
Winning
8 Points
The Contender
Kierhein
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Are race differences in IQ genetic?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
someloser
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/27/2016 Category: Science
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 773 times Debate No: 90295
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (15)
Votes (2)

 

someloser

Pro

Many thanks to Kierhein, my opponent, for accepting the debate! For anyone else interested, comment here (http://www.debate.org......)

Rules:
- Pro and Con will avoid debating the merits of IQ as a metric, or race as a classification system. While these are certainly debatable, being largely seperate and rather nuanced subjects, they would be best suited to their own debates.

Note that, as a result, race will not be defined for the purposes of the debate. Given that virtually all data on the subject relies on self-identification, there should be no need for it either.
- BOP is initially shared but can be debated/shifted
- No new points should be brought up beyond Round 3
- No kritiks
- My opponent will not attempt to define "race" for the purposes of the debate
- All sources must be provided in-text of the debate
- Keep it civil
- Violation of the rules merits a loss

Stances:
- Pro will argue that racial IQ gaps are owed to genetic differences between racial groups. At least to a significant degree.
- Con will argue that the racial IQ gaps are not owed to genetic differences between racial groups. Either in the absolute, or to any non-negligible extent

Format:
Round 1 = Acceptance
Round 2 = Opening arguments
Round 3 = Response to opponents' opening arguments
Round 4 = Defense of own opening arguments, closing statements
Round 5 = Extra slot in case of a forfeit. If no one forfeits, both Pro and Con waive it
Kierhein

Con

I accept.
Debate Round No. 1
someloser

Pro

Arguments

A meta-analysis [2] published in Personnel Psychology, 2001, found that American blacks, on average, score around one standard deviation (15 points) lower than American whites. The article aggregated 105 previous studies, with a collective sample size of over 6 million. All participants were at least 14 years of age.

Gaps in average IQ between racial groups have been observed, largely unchanged, since data collection on the subject began. As the results of a 2013 review demonstrated [1]:



These gaps persist across the socioeconomic spectrum, and cannot be directly explained by average differences in socioeconomic status (SES) between racial groups. Herrnstein and Murray 1994 [4] found that the size of the gap actually increases in accordance to SES level:



Other analyses, such as Gottfredson 2003 [3], Jensen 1998 [5], and Loehlin, Lindzey, and Spuhler 1975 [6] found the same trend.

Given the natural history of racial groups and race differences, it is perfectly reasonable to expect differences in cognitive ability as well. Human racial groups vary in a wide variety of traits, including susceptibility to certain diseases [15], and non-superficial geographical adaptations [17]. Given that blacks and whites have unequal levels of admixture with Neanderthals [8], there is even more reason to expect cognitive differences.

Even more specifically, we know that racial groups differ in brain size [9] [10] [11]. Additionally, we know from monozygotic twin studies that brain size is extremely heritable - over 80%. On the individual level, brain size is connected to cognitive performance, as a 2005 meta-analysis found that people with larger brains tend to score higher on IQ tests [13]. This is not entirely conclusive, though it does make the genetic explanation of the gaps worthy of serious consideration.

However, there is an increasing amount of data on the distribution of genes that may impact IQ across racial groups. For example, Wu and Zhang 2011 [12] found varying levels of differentiation regarding a variety of functional genes, between certain populations (Africans, Asians, and Europeans).

Wu and Zhang 2011

Note the position of hindbrain and neuron development, contrasted with that of pigmentation.

Some of the most compelling evidence for a genetic explanation comes in the form of genome-wide analysis studies (GWAS). With genetic data from certain racial/ethnic populations, a 2015 paper [14] used individual SNPs strongly associated with IQ on the individual level to predict the IQs of said populations. The results almost exactly matched the actual IQs of those populations in developed countries:




Further studies [16] [18] have come to similar results.

Sources:

1] http://humanvarieties.org...
2] https://home.ubalt.edu...
3] http://www.udel.edu...
4] Herrnstein, Richard J., and Charles A. Murray. The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life. New York: Free, 1994. Print. Page 288.
5] Jensen, Arthur R. The G Factor: The Science of Mental Ability. Westport, CT: Praeger, 1998. Print. Page 358.
6] Loehlin, John C., Gardner Lindzey, and J. N. Spuhler. Race Differences in Intelligence. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman, 1975. Print.
7] http://www.larspenke.eu...
8] http://science.sciencemag.org...
9] http://philipperushton.net...
10] http://news.rutgers.edu...
11] http://www.sciencedirect.com...
12] http://bmcevolbiol.biomedcentral.com...
13] http://www.people.vcu.edu...
14] https://thewinnower.com...
15] http://www.cdc.gov...
16] http://www.ibc7.org...
17] http://pubmed.gov...
18] https://figshare.com...
Kierhein

Con

Skipped round (see round structure for details).
Debate Round No. 2
Kierhein

Con

FF, sorry again for the delays. I simply don't have time right now for a debate.
Debate Round No. 3
Kierhein

Con

Kierhein forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
Kierhein

Con

Kierhein forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
15 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by someloser 1 year ago
someloser
Sure. Ill send the challenge in a couple of days
Posted by DavidMancke 1 year ago
DavidMancke
Fine, just stick with IQ.

Once I see the posting I may ask for revisions, but nothing to severe.

First round acceptance, 2nd round constructives, 3rd, 4th and final rebuttals. No new argument in final round, but new examples are welcome.
Posted by someloser 1 year ago
someloser
how is "cognitive ability" being defined/can IQ be used as a proxy or measure for it during debate
and sure
Posted by DavidMancke 1 year ago
DavidMancke
And change IQ to, "cognitive ability" in the terms of the resolution.

If you prefer I can offer the topic to you.
Posted by someloser 1 year ago
someloser
kritiks? not interested unless they're going to be directed at IQ/race as a concept. at which point we might as well just debate on those as an aside.

and note Id be playing DA either way since my stance changed significantly since the original challenge went up
Posted by DavidMancke 1 year ago
DavidMancke
Offer the topic to me and I will take it Monday. 72 hrs per, 10k character count. Critquies included.
Posted by someloser 1 year ago
someloser
davie tries and fails again, like clockwork!

"It is a conclusion reached upon preponderance of all the evidence not merely what they stated in the book."
that's interesting, given you said the book is "propaganda for eugenics". of course, davie is always free to cite some evidence.

"You're accusing me of an irrelevant conclusion fallacy"
davie thinks tacking "x fallacy" onto his gibberish makes him smart... a good debater, even! if you can imagine that.

of course, davie similarly thinks calling the badthink names will make it disappear. because the badthink implies eugenics, apparently. this shows davie's sense of morality is totally skewed and irrelevant. don't be like davie.

additionally, davie himself commits a half-baked tu quoque, in an attempt to run... take note that at no point did he say I was -wrong- in my accusation. a cowardly move that suits him all too well
Posted by DavidMancke 1 year ago
DavidMancke
Even the dog in the parking lot knows the folks that put that together didn't up and volunteer they were advocating for eugenics. It is a conclusion reached upon preponderance of all the evidence not merely what they stated in the book. Your request is a fallacy of suppressed evidence.

Murray's advocacy of eugenics is robustly established.

You're accusing me of an irrelevant conclusion fallacy, but if memory serves, you never reach the basic burden your resolution requires. This topic is a resolution of fact, where the burden is on the advocate to show the claim is true. You must show a causal link to your conclusion that the gap is explained by race, and you volunteer that your conclusion is an assumption.
Posted by someloser 1 year ago
someloser
Certain aspects of The Bell Curve have been criticized. Not that I care since I'm not citing the whole book - see the page number? Last time you had a tantrum over this, you sent me a load of links, none of which looked at the specific claim that was being cited.

to make things interesting though... give me a quote from the Bell Curve that shows it is "propaganda for eugenics". -A- quote
Posted by DavidMancke 1 year ago
DavidMancke
Herrnstein and Murray 1994 is simply the bell curve, has been widely debunked and is a propaganda piece for eugenics. The titular Murray is a prominent advocate for eugenics.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by famousdebater 1 year ago
famousdebater
someloserKierheinTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Full forfeiture meant that Pro was the only person to present arguments. Since that con offered no rebuttals or arguments Pro wins by default.
Vote Placed by tejretics 1 year ago
tejretics
someloserKierheinTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: FF