Hi
So I've just listened to this : http://mises.org/media/4691
Hoppe says that one of the explanation for the industrial revolution is that Europeans were simply more intelligent. According to him, there's a long natural selection that tooks place until the Welfare state grown bigger and bigger : people who were more intelligent were more successful and earned more money than those who were stupid, so they could die older and have more children.
So centuries after centuries, this took place, but only in northern countries. Why ? Because living conditions are "harsher" in these places, and living is easier than in the so-called third world countries, where "every days look the same".
And now I wonder, how can he says that living was harsher in northern countries than in... Africa for exemple ? We've all watched reports on TV where we see people in villages in Africa eating dirt, dying from deseases, having no water, having to walk 6 hours each day to seek waters or to go to the nearest school... so how was it harder than peasants in England ?
EDIT : subsidary question : I have an economic history exams in 10 days about the industrial revolution. Can I write that northern people (French, yeay !) are more intelligent that african/asian/indians and that's why the industrial revolution happened in Europe ? =D
If the thesis is that the dumb died off under evolutionary pressures it should be easy enough to prove. All that needs to be shown is that Africans have a broader range of intelligence levels, no?
Thats not the theory. No one died off. The populations deviated from one another due to environmental pressure. Those who were able to adapt the existing technology were able to move further north where they were not competing with other groups.
One, it disproves the hypothesis that the highest IQ race develops the fastest.
If all else was equal then it would. But China and Japan were at about the same level technologicly untill they isolated themselves. IQ theory does not claim that intellegence is the only reason certain groups advance at a faster pace. Other factors are just as important.
Two, it disproves the climes theory of IQ.
How so?
"No it doesnt. The technology level possessed by the native americans was at a level sufficient to allow them to thrive in the warmer climates. Their technology was insufficient to allow them to thrive in colder climates. Survive yes, thrive no." ....I am speechless :], but then again I never really liked those damn Mongoloids! Burn EM! WE NEED TO SEND EM BACK TO CHINA! ahh the Irony [WARNING I AM BEING SARCASTIC] Edited Does anyone know how the new system work? Can't seem to qoute!
The populations deviated from one another due to environmental pressure. Those who were able to adapt the existing technology were able to move further north where they were not competing with other groups.
If that is what he says he might be on to something.
"The technology level possessed by the native americans was at a level sufficient to allow them to thrive in the warmer climates. "
And yet it is in the fertile warmer areas of the world around the middle east, North Africa and India that the first agricultural innovations and the settling of cities was established.
"When the King is far the people are happy." Chinese proverb
For Alexander Zinoviev and the free market there is a shared delight:
"Where there are problems there is life."
http://mises.org/media/1277
This is the 'Ideology, Religion, Biology, Environment' lecture or more like the 'Relgion' lecture since he only finished discussing religion after more than an hour. But it was very impressive.
So here's why Europe developed faster than the rest of the world: Christianity is more friendly to capital accumulation and entreprenuership than all other religions except Confucianism.
Why did China develop slower despite Confucianism(and I think this is empirically indisputable): Institutional separation of Church and (monarchical) State. The king was scared of being excommunicated by the Church so he didn't do much harm. Church is a good counterbalance to the kings power because it is funded voluntarily whereas king can collect rent occasionally. In China, the high Confucian elders are employed in the state.
Hoppe simplifies things by working from the perspective of a natural order. In a natural order, the brightest and most skilled become rich and, since there is no public education(subsidizing poor children leading to more poor children), the rich have more children. So this leads to a natural selection. I believe this is a valid statement.
Climate also matters. The fact that man survives in a harsh climate presupposes that he has developed methods or technologies to survive.
But the allegation that whites are simply more intelligent is I believe false. There are studies which clearly point out that Chinese > Whites > Blacks when it comes to intelligence. Although the same could not be characteristic of the world 500 years ago.
"http://mises.org/media/1277
But the allegation that whites are simply more intelligent is I believe false. There are studies which clearly point out that Chinese > Whites > Blacks when it comes to intelligence. Although the same could not be characteristic of the world 500 years ago."
Why is it that there was separation of Church and State? Why was the religion more friendly to capital accumulation and entreprenuership? Why did Western Culture value innovation and individualism? Is it because of intelligence? I don't know. It's a bit of a stretch. This is where praxeology ends and empiricism begins.
(But IQ is deliberately scaled to make 100 the average, so averaging a 100 is not exactly a feat.)
Hey nandnor.
Did you know that children of Italians and Eastern Europeans who immigrated to America did worse on IQ tests than black Americans? As in, the best scoring of the former still did worse than the worst of the latter?
IQ is genetic, but there are too many factors. Too many factors.
And most of all, be careful in interpreting statistics.
So all the smart folks moved away. Very clever. I don't buy it, but it's very clever.
But WHY was there downward mobility?
I'd say living conditions in certain parts of Africa were pretty harsh too, but IQ tests have shown that the people living in those areas have low IQ scores. Also, East Asians score higher on IQ tests (which do measure intelligence and intelligence is strongly correlated with genetic factors) than do Europeans. I wouldn't say that the living conditions in Japan or Korea were significantly harsher than the living conditions in Northern Europe. Lastly, European Jews score the highest on IQ tests. Based on all of this, I'd say there are many more factors than the harshness of environment that determine intelligence.
Political Atheists Blog
Hey, I've just found a video that is more complete than the audio track :
http://vimeo.com/5024681
Hoppe says that people are more intelligent in northern regions, and the industrial revolution happened in England rather than in Mesopotamia because... well, people who lived in mesopotamia were intelligent enough for an agricultural revolution, but not an industrial one...
He also says that property rights aren't sufficient to have a good economy, you also need smart people to make it work. That would mean that African are in deep ship because even if there is a strong enforcement of private property and individual rights, it wouldn't work.
And he says that in... Turkey !
Right, but would you seriously say that Africa has a pleasant environment? Certain areas of Africas are, without a doubt, harsher than Europe.
No I've already said that was dubious to say that living in "tropical region" is less harsher than living in northern region. And by the way, why no agricultural revolution happened in South Africa, Australia's east coast, extreme-south America, north America ?
Hoppe says that people in some regions were intellectually able to have an agricultural revolution but they lacked a good environnement, mediteranean weather, flat soil, rivers etc.
I don't really know what to think about it. As long as Hoppe wants individual and property rights and doesn't say black people should be exterminated, that's fine x)