by David Sims
DailyKenn.com — The races of mankind differ in average intelligence, and IQ is a numerical index of intelligence. Western Civilization, built by white people of European descent, is the world’s first civilization based upon high technology. It is the civilization that first developed the use of electric power. Any other group that uses electrically powered devices is culturally appropriating from white people.
Because of this reliance upon advanced technology, many of the best jobs in the West require a high level of intelligence for satisfactory job performance. The distributed racial differences in intelligence will cause the free market racial distribution in hiring for those jobs to deviate with the racial demographic proportions in the country. Demagogues among the less intelligent races often cry foul over this deviation, even though it is natural and no foul play really exists.
While it is true that someone’s race doesn’t determine his individual IQ, it does determine the probability for a randomly chosen member of a race to have an IQ being at, or above, a specified value.
The normal distribution that most closely matches the IQ distribution of white male US citizens is 103.08±14.54 (Jensen & Reynolds, "Sex Differences on the WISC-R," Personality & Individual Differences, volume 4, number 2, pp. 223-226, 1983).
The normal distribution that most closely matches the IQ distribution of US-resident mulattoes (usually called "blacks" or "African-Americans") is 85.0±13.0 (a typical finding of studies since 1950).
A good approximation of the fraction, f, of a race having an average IQ of x̄ and a standard deviation in IQ of σ, which is above the minimum IQ of μ, can be found as follows:
f(μ) = [σ√(2π)]⁻¹ ∫(μ,∞) exp{ −[(x−x̄)/σ]²/2 } dx
Taking advantage of the normal distribution's symmetry, we make it more easily integrable.
f(μ) = ½ − [σ√(2π)]⁻¹ ∫(x̄,μ) exp{ −[(x−x̄)/σ]²/2 } dx
You can avoid integrating the probability density function if you have a handy error function to call.
f(μ) = 1 − ½ { 1 + erf [(μ−x̄)/(σ√2)] }
Let us suppose that an employer wants to hire workers for a job that, in his opinion, requires a minimum IQ of 130 for satisfactory performance. He lives in an area that is demographically typical for the United States, where whites outnumber blacks by a ratio of five.
The fraction of whites who are qualified for the job on the basis of IQ is
f( μ=130.0, x̄=103.08, σ=14.54 ) = 0.0320528311
The fraction of blacks who are qualified for the job on the basis of IQ is
f( μ=130.0, x̄=85, σ=13 ) = 0.0002685491
If the populations of whites and of blacks were equal in size, then the ratio of mentally qualified whites to mentally qualified blacks would be 119.355755.
Since whites outnumber blacks in the area where the employer's business is, by a ratio of five, the actual ratio of mentally qualified whites to mentally qualified blacks is 596.778775.
If the employer needs fewer than 100 new employees, it could very easily turn out that he will hire no blacks at all, even if he uses no racism whatsoever in selecting his hirelings. In fact, of the occasions in which this scenario plays out, and exactly 100 new workers are hired, the employer will have hired...
100 whites and 0 blacks on 84.5% of occasions
99 whites and 1 black on 14.2% of occasions
98 whites and 2 blacks on 1.2% of occasions
97− whites and 3+ blacks on 0.1% of occasions
Because the United States is a First World country in which most of the best jobs are mentally challenging jobs, purely free-market hiring practices will exclude a demographically disproportionately high fraction of low-average-IQ races from those jobs. This is normal and natural. It is the only way by which a country can remain competitive internationally, especially with countries that don't engage in politically correct tampering with the free market for labor. A focus on merit is a good thing. It is in conflict with diversity and inclusion. Therefore, diversity and inclusion are bad ideas, and to focus on them, instead of on merit, is harmful.
200 latest news reports from 100 top conservative websites
0 comments:
Post a Comment