Content deleted Content added
Best not to mislead the reader into believing that IQ tests are not valid measures of intelligence. They are valid predictors of educational success and income, for example, which makes them good measures of at least SOME aspects of intelligence. Tag: Reverted |
Replaced Native Americans, which still have clearly distinct features more similar to those of East Asians, with North Indians, who actually share recent ancestry with Europeans. Tag: Reverted |
||
Line 23:
{{FAQ row|show=no
|q=Why do people insist that race is "biologically meaningless"?
|a=[[Race (human categorization)|Mostly because it is.]] As explained in the answer to the previous question, race isn't defined by genetics. Race is nothing but an arbitrary list of traits, because race is defined by observable features. The list isn't even consistent from one comparison to another. We distinguish between African and European people on the basis of skin color, but what about Middle Eastern, Asian, and Native American people? They all have more or less the same skin color. We distinguish African and Asian people from European people by the shape of some of their facial features, but what about
{{FAQ row|show=no
|q=But [[Heritability of IQ|IQ is at least somewhat heritable]]. Doesn't that mean that observed differences in IQ test performance between ancestral population groups must have a genetic component?
|