1100 words
The Chinese have one of the highest IQs in the world. Their 100 and 108 in Hong Kong give them an average of 104. Chinese intelligence has been increasing from the 1940s all the way to today. This is the ‘Flynn Effect’ in action. Lui and Lynn (2013) reported that IQ scores are improving for 12-year-old Chinese children. The increases are as follows: 6.19 points for full-scale IQ, 6.55 points for performance IQ, and 1.91 points for verbal IQ. The Jintan Child Study is an ongoing longitudinal study to show the effects of health and cognitive ability.
They used 1656 6th graders (55.5 percent boys and 45.5 percent girls, “consisting of 24.3% of all children in this age range in the Jintan city region born in 1999.”) who either graduated or currently were in the grade with an average age of 12.2 years. The study from 86-87 used only individuals from urban areas, so Liu and Lynn did the same. They conclude that over the 26 years from the original study, between the two data sets that increases of 2.38 points on full-scale IQ, .73 points on verbal, and 2.52 points on performance IQ per decade. They theorize that economic development is a cause of rising IQ scores due to better nutrition. The study concludes a 105.89 IQ for the 12-year-olds in the study.
Liu and Lynn (2015) also observed the same sex differences in the same magnitude in Chinese and American boys and girls. In a study of 788 children aged 12 years old, boys obtained a higher IQ by 3.75 points on average. This exactly mirrors what Rushton and Jackson (2005) say about American men and women who are college aged. They state that males score 3.63 points higher than women. Liu and Lynn state that boys obtained 4.20 points higher in performance IQ, and 2.40 points higher in verbal IQ. This is what we would expect, evolutionarily speaking. The men need to be more intelligent to provide food, whereas women need to have a higher verbal IQ to be able to talk to and take care of children. The fact that the magnitude of sex differences in IQ between men and women has been noticed in the U.S. and China shows that sex differences in the brain do exist.
Better nutrition is a definite cause for the rise in IQ for the Chinese. Richard Lynn says that better nutrition is critical for increased cognitive functioning. This is one reason why Africa’s IQ is so low. Due to more Chinese getting better jobs and making more money, they were getting higher quality foods in order to be adequately nourished. Better nutrition explains most, if not all of the Flynn Effect. It’s what to expect if this phenomenon was not on g (it’s not), it’s on the intelligence that is affected by the environment, hence, bigger increases on that type of intelligence in comparison to the intelligence highly correlated with g.
The Chinese have the largest cranial capacity at 1492 ml. The bigger one’s brain, the more cortical neurons it has which allows for better cognitive processing. Piantadosi and Kidd (2016) corroborated one of Rushton’s theories on brain size and child rearing. Mainly that r/K selection theory explains Piantadosi and Kidd’s theory of earlier births being correlated with higher intelligence due to greater necessity to care for the more vulnerable child in comparison to those with smaller brains. Moreover, since East Asians have more myelin in the brain, this too adds to their higher cognition. Since the correlation between brain size and IQ is .35, a good amount of the variance in IQ can be explained by brain size.
We can also look at Chinese outside of China. Singapore, for instance, has an IQ of 108, the highest in the world. They’re also 74.4 percent Chinese. This is then mirrored in their IQ as well as their economy. Anywhere the Chinese go they are high achievers in both IQ as well as wealth attainment.
There are other measures to show that Chinese have higher IQs. In tests of reaction times, Rushton and Jensen (2005) say that East Asians beat whites while whites beat blacks. Since faster reaction times are associated with a more efficient brain, East Asians have a higher IQ as a result of that. Though, they are weak on verbal IQ, average 99 for Chinese in America and China, they are superior in visio-spatial IQ. This is due to their ancestors evolving in the harsh winters of Siberia which lead to being more K-selected and selecting for bigger brains which lead to children being born earlier and higher intelligence evolving to better care for defenseless children. Bigger brains also evolved due to colder temperatures, which is another cause for earlier childbirth and an even bigger increase in general intelligence to adapt.
IQ in China is higher in urban areas than in rural areas, which is seen in America as well. This is due to those with higher intelligence having the ability to be able to live in the city due to a better ability to attain wealth due to higher IQ. Those in rural areas have lower IQ, some having a lower IQ genetically, while others are depressed by bad nutrition. So with better nutrition, a lot of the rural Chinese would get an IQ boost. Nutrition is critical for brain development in vitro as well as in early childhood leading into young adulthood. This ensures the brain has adequate nutrients for growth and in turn grows to its full potential.
The Chinese are the best example of Rushton’s theory of intelligence and brain size. No matter where they go, if they have adequate nutrition, they have the biggest brains and highest IQs which shows in scholastic achievement as well as wealth attainment. The increase in full-scale IQ for China in the past 30 years is due to better nutrition as well as economic growth. Singapore has one of the world’s best economies and is 74.4 percent Chinese.
This extreme K-selection, though, is causing the Chinese birth rate to drop. This is the curse for high IQ peoples. They have a lower birth rate in comparison to those with lower IQs who have a higher birth rate. The current birth rate in China is 1.66. That is devastatingly low, almost as low as Germany and Japan (both at 1.3) and they have similar IQs as well. It seems that this intelligence increase is coming with a lower birth rate. Higher intelligence is correlated with a lower sex drive so this is another cause for the lower birth rate in East Asian countries as these slight IQ increases continue to occur. The same sex differences as seen in America were also seen in China, giving more evidence to the sexual selection theory of intelligence.
NotPoliticallyCorrect 
The Chinese are smarter than all White groups then? And women are indeed not as impressive as men in smarts?
LikeLike
Pretty much. I have heard there are big scandals on China with PISA and SAT and things like that, though no idea how true it is. I see a lot of people on the Right who say that Chinese aren’t more intelligent than Whites. They are, slightly. All of the data points to it. From IQ data to scholastic achievement to monetary success, all of those correlate highly with intelligence and if one group has all 3 of those traits then they’re pretty damn intelligent.
Those in rural China are obviously less intelligent. It’s like that in our rural areas as well. Lack of good nutrition is one cause, lower genotypic IQ another.
Not really. Slight 3.63 IQ point advantage seen in American men in comparison to women. Differing brain structure also is another cause as well as different evolutionary tracks. The women Nobel Prize achievement says it all as well as how many women go into STEM (not a lot).
Also check this chapter of Erectus Walks Amongst Us for selection pressures.
Basically men needed to be more intelligent to gather and hunt food whereas women needed a higher verbal IQ for child rearing. They were selected for beauty as well. Conversely, African women were selected for slightly higher intelligence due to being the food gatherers whereas the African men were selected for physical attractiveness. Testosterone is a huge mediator there and is also why black women are seen as less attractive.
Women, on average are more physically attractive than men. EXCEPT BLACK WOMEN. The data shows black women as not being statistically different from the average, and far less attractive than whites, Asians and Native American women.
The cause is higher testosterone. Kanazawa says that the cause for this is due to the mean BMI of black women being 28.5 among black women and 26.1 among non-black women. Though he says that’s not the reason why black women are less physically attractive. Black women have lower levels of intellect net of BMI. Even the racial differences in intelligence don’t account for these differences. Black women are STILL less physically attractive, net of BMI and intelligence. Kanazawa says: “Net of intelligence, black men are significantly more physically attractive than nonblack men.”
Why is that? He says the reason is testosterone. He ends up concluding that testosterone differences are the only cause for these differences. With blacks having the highest testosterone out of all the races, black women obviously have higher rates of testosterone than white women. Those women with higher levels of testosterone have more masculine features, therefore making them less attractive.
Since attractiveness is correlated with IQ, as well as facial symmetry, those with those two traits look better than those that don’t have it. East Asian women are pretty damn attractive, on average, proving the hypothesis of attractiveness and intelligence.
LikeLike
Highly interesting article…!
LikeLike
Over at another blog (http://socialdemocracy21stcentury.blogspot.com) a poster came over and went on about race not being a thing. He dumped these links:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/07/06/human-race-biology-scientific-racism_n_7699490.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/30/racism-race-explained-science-anthropologist_n_7687842.html
http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674417311
http://www.livescience.com/47627-race-is-not-a-science-concept.html
http://www.newsweek.com/there-no-such-thing-race-283123
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_(human_categorization)#Views_across_disciplines_over_time
LikeLike
I love race deniers. I’ll go through this trash tonight.
LikeLike
Would be interested in more posts about Chinese IQ and the Chinese subgroups. Been reading up on the Hakka – interesting segment.
Blog posts/links on dysgenics related to the monarchy or aristocracy also requested
I discussed this article,
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/10053977/The-Victorians-were-smarter-than-us-study-suggests.html
with some friends in great detail a while back. It stimulated great debate and discussion.
LikeLike
Will do. Have any links? I know the Han are 90 percent of China so this group you’re talking about must be a pretty small segment of the population.
Coming soon. Interesting topic of discussion. Those descended royal bloodlines are a tad more inbred than those who weren’t. In order to keep the bloodline pure they married close family, obviously closer than third cousins, as we can see from Iceland that 3rd cousin marriages produce more children as well as there being no deleterious effects on IQ nor birth defects.
Do you think we were smarter 500 years ago in comparison to now?
Great and interesting article. I’d like to know how the studies from the Victorian era were carried out. I like how at the end dysgenics is to blame and they say low IQ people are outbreeding high IQ people.
I wonder if anyone thought to today with our current dysgenic decline and how blacks are the most dysgenic ethnic group in America.
LikeLike
I think the general view on the Right is that they may have a higher mean, but they have a narrower distribution and thus fewer geniuses on the far right tail of the curve, and or that they are less creative. That’s usually what people on the Right mean when they say they aren’t more intelligent, although some believe that they’re less intelligent on average as well.
LikeLike
Richard Lynn was emailed about the smaller distribution in the East Asian bell curve and he said no evidence exists for it.
People say they’re less creative, which is true. They do copy a lot. However, Rushton said that bigger brains have a higher capacity to be more creative. With social restrictions lifted, he says, East Asians can be more creative than Europeans.
To disbelieve the notion of East Asian intellectual superiority is to disregard all data that points to it which is intellectually dishonest. Differing populations, differing traits are both positively and negatively expressed.
LikeLike
Talking about creativity of East Asians, watch the video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z_WSJUNxPZc
It is very interesting to watch the comparison between Denmark students vs. Chinese students.
LikeLike
Is there an English version? What do they say?
LikeLike
I think in terms of creativity, once the economy is lifted and better nutritions are provided, East Asians are catching up with the creativity.
When it comes to computer, people tend to associate with Bill Gates, who is hugely responsible for Microsoft. But no one bats an eye on Wang Laboratories whose word processors were also on par with Microsoft. If you read the history, Bill Gates had admitted that he HAD to fight off Wang Laboratories because Wang labs was the only predominant opponent in word processing software industries at the time.
The bottom line is East Asians do not have strong base to take off their inventions and creativity as compared to their White counterparts, which can also be due to their presence in the White predominant country.
Look at the Apple history. The tiny iPad that can ONLY play music with a tiny screen that only shows which song is playing, the program was developed by *Creative* company from Singapore and Apple stole it. Then they settled in 2006.
https://www.cnet.com/news/apple-settles-with-creative-for-100-million-1/
But things are changing these days. Look at
Yahoo co-founder, Jerry Yang,
Youtube co-founder, Steve Chen
Also look at the traditional games played by East Asian, “GO” game with black and white marble.
It took half a decade to come up with the machine learning program to finally beat the human in 2016 — AlphaGo program.
DeepBlue has defeated the world Chess Champion in 1997.
How many PhDs have been employed to work on AlphaGo program to be able to beat the most profound game in history?
https://research.googleblog.com/2016/01/alphago-mastering-ancient-game-of-go.html
I like what you said
“To disbelieve the notion of East Asian intellectual superiority is to disregard all data that points to it which is intellectually dishonest. Differing populations, differing traits are both positively and negatively expressed.”
LikeLike
Fully agree. If social restrictions were lifted then they’d be able to be more creative than Europeans. Brain size is linked to more complex behaviors and East Asians have the biggest brains on average as well as having a higher visio-spatial IQ. They’d be more creative especially with their higher average visio-spatial IQ.
Thanks for the link. East Asian dominance in tech fields and the like is due to their cognitive profile. Thanks for the compliment.
LikeLike
Their 100 and 108 in Hong Kong give them an average of 104.”
So if Hong Kong disappeared, the IQ of Chinese would be 100 – the same as the average for caucasians. So all your reasons present for why the Chinese are so smart is just a rubbish ‘just-so’ story.
LikeLike
Read my newest articles on IQ. I don’t think they’re “so smart” on the basis of “IQ” anymore. My views have substantially changed.
LikeLike
I live here. It isn’t true. Chinese people in general are highly unintelligent.as the majority are not educated well. I say this as a teacher in China. These IQ figures are from a select group of schools. As per normal in this country, this figure has been falsified. It us impossible for the average IQ of China go be 105. I would stake my life on that IQ being below 90.
LikeLike
I am a Chinese that grew up in America and I travel frequently between both countries. I can safely say that what you are saying is wrong. Chinese on average definitely have a higher IQ than whites. It is quite apparent when it comes to basic math. Even the poorest uneducated farmers in China have better simple math skills than most white people I meet. I believe your perception is high influenced by your opinion of factors other than IQ. For example, their lack of manners or civility. However, manners is not IQ. Politeness and social graces is not IQ either. These things are important but they are not IQ.
LikeLike
this is what people think of when they think of rr’s blog: https://www.rt.com/op-ed/471582-jessica-yaniv-transgender-wax-balls/
LikeLike