2015 February 01 Sunday
Gregory Clark On Our Status Genotype

Gregory Clark, outlining arguments from his book The Son Also Rises: Surnames and the History of Social Mobility (The Princeton Economic History of the Western World), says there is "a general social competence of families and that that competence really changes slowly across generations".

Clark's findings make decades of inequality studies by economists look silly. Their confirmation bias blinded them and they wasted a lot of time and pushed a lot of bad policies as a result.

When we know all the genetic variations that contribute to social competence and economic success it should be possible to do a much better job measuring the efficacy of societal institutions (schools, regulatory policies, courts, markets) in enabling people to achieve their genetic potential. Quite a few policies are based on very wrong (tabula rasa) assumptions about human potential. We could have less stupid policies we stopped pretending outcomes are purely based on social environment.

In the West the resistance to a realistic view of humanity will last for many years beyond the point where advances in genetics and neurobiology disprove most tenets of secular faiths. But I expect many East Asian governments will rather eagerly apply actionable results from sciences of human nature and their societies will reap big benefits as a result. Rulers in Singapore, Taipei, Beijing, Tokyo, and Seoul in particular will make more realistic policies based on science.

Out of the East Asian governments I expect Singapore is the one that will benefit the most. Singapore already has an immigration policy aimed at attracting professionals and a government willing to do more realistic social engineering (as compared to Marxist social engineering). Imagine what Singapore might do with genetic tests on prospective immigrants: only let in those whose genetic profiles for social behaviors and intellect will create an extremely prosperous society.

Singapore might end up serving as a model for some other small sovereign jurisdictions. Any small government willing to set up laws to let in only those with the most social competence and creative potential could create conditions for a far more successful than any currently existing. Such a transformation is easier to do to a smaller society because it is easier to find enough high functioning people to create a new majority for a smaller society than for a larger one. A society with too many bad starting conditions (a large existing population, bad location, harsh weather, high crime, etc) will not be able to do this transformation. I think we will witness a global sort where the most talented and able people concentrate in some smaller countries with highly selective immigration laws.

Also see Gregory Clark's previous book, A Farewell To Alms, which outlines the selective pressures for both genotypes and norms and beliefs that cause higher economic success.

Share |      By Randall Parker at 2015 February 01 09:23 AM 


Comments
Engineer-Poet said at February 1, 2015 10:40 AM:

What happens to children of high-competence people who fall below the level of qualification for admission?

Gerard Mason said at February 1, 2015 5:57 PM:

The law of unintended consequences will ensure that Singapore has the most intelligent unemployed and unemployable people on the planet and therefore, eventually, the worst social strife.

Wolf-Dog said at February 2, 2015 12:39 AM:

Although a high IQ society such as Singapore would be much more competitive for unemployed people, it is also very likely that the already employed people will be able to create jobs for the unemployed.


According to this article the unemployment in Singapore is less than 2 %:

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/singapore/unemployment-rate


This article says that Singapore has an average IQ of 108. If true, this would be the highest in the world:

http://therealsingapore.com/content/study-singaporeans-are-worlds-most-intelligent-people

Wolf-Dog said at February 2, 2015 12:40 AM:

Although a high IQ society such as Singapore would be much more competitive for unemployed people, it is also very likely that the already employed people will be able to create jobs for the unemployed.


According to this article the unemployment in Singapore is less than 2 %:

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/singapore/unemployment-rate


This article says that Singapore has an average IQ of 108. If true, this would be the highest in the world:

http://therealsingapore.com/content/study-singaporeans-are-worlds-most-intelligent-people

Wolf-Dog said at February 2, 2015 1:21 AM:

That being said, it is instructive to note that there are a lot of working poor in Hong Kong, which is also a very high IQ society. "Employed" doesn't always mean happy: Many of the working poor people in Hong Kong live in abject poverty and they have very low standards of life. So there has to be a certain balance between social Darwinism and humanism.(And the humane treatment of poorer groups will depend on the availability of cheap energy in the future, as this would make charity more feasible. But if future energy cannot be developed, we shall see far more brutal wars than in the previous century.)

Jim said at February 2, 2015 7:49 AM:

Wolf Dog - Is the 108 IQ the average for the Singaporean Chinese only or for the whole population incuding Malays and Indians. If the latter the Singaporean Chinese average most be even higher.

Wolf-Dog said at February 2, 2015 6:24 PM:

Jim - I don't know if the 108 IQ cited in the article is only about the enthic Chinese Singaporeans, but I assume that it includes all citizens. After all, the IQ scores in the US or France include all ethnic groups who have citizenship or at least permanent resident status.

But the Wikipedia article about Singapore says that " 75 percent of the population is Chinese, with significant minorities of Malays, Indians, and Eurasians. There are four official languages, English, Malay, Mandarin, and Tamil ".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singapore

At the end of the article above, it is written that the average IQ in Malaysia and India is is 92 and 82 respectively, and therefore we can assume that the average ethnic Chinese Singaporeans have even higher IQ scores than 108.

And according to the following article, Shanghai has an average IQ of 111.6 while the Chinese national average is 103, and so we can assume that in elite city states like Singapore the average ethnic Chinese would have much higher IQs than the national average.

http://akarlin.com/2012/08/analysis-of-chinas-pisa-2009-results/


But I wouln't give too much importance to pure IQ scores, a lot of smart people are also very cruel and selfish, and so there must be a balance between various human qualities. By the end of this century computers will become smarter than humans, and all human neural networks will be emulated by computers at an even higher level. Also, if genetically engineered humans become much smarter than their makers (top scientists in leading universities and corporations would naturally have very high IQ scores), then they will probably despise even their creators and one day they might even get rid of them. So IQ is not everything.

Dan said at February 3, 2015 10:30 AM:

I live in Montgomery County, Maryland. This was historically one of the top school districts in the country, and it is certainly one of the biggest and most important.

Our local school board is axing the Montgomery County Superintendent of Schools for failure to Close the Gap. Lol. Apparently it remains exactly the same. He worked like a Turk, but it serves him right for promising to Close the Gap. He probably thought he was merely reciting a standard progressive prayer but the school board simply took him at his word.

Moral: You may think conservatives have it bad, but progressives have it worse. They must swallow the largest helpings of the dishes they serve.

Florida resident said at February 3, 2015 12:47 PM:

I watched oral presentation by Gregory Clark in full
(before reading about it on "parapundit".)
It more or less coincides with
what I learned from those selective parts
of his book "And son also rising", which parts I have read.
.
However, I did not like his style of presentation.
.
He spent the first part of his talk, discussing (and even promoting) the idea
that genes have little to do with the level of social mobility.
.
Then in the second part of the talk he explained,
how brilliant were his research methods,
which allowed him to establish the all-important role of genes.
.
May be for fellows of RAS (Royal Arts Society) this is optimum style:
to present the drama of ideas first,
and only then to say what he actually meant.
.
But for an un-enlightened ordinary person like me this was too much.
.
I use this occasion to register my respect of ParaPundit.

Seth W. said at February 4, 2015 2:41 PM:

What's with all the genetic-race-iq talk?

What are we talking about, ethnicity, intelligence, immigration.... What?


Post a comment
Comments:
Name (not anon or anonymous):
Email Address:
URL:
Remember info?

      
 
Web parapundit.com
Go Read More Posts On ParaPundit
Site Traffic Info
The contents of this site are copyright