Why did white people dominate the world if Asians have higher IQ's?

Status
Closed

Aupmanyav

Ad Honorem
Jun 2014
5,739
New Delhi, India
Talking of Indians, we do not have the desire to dominate. We believe it to be a sin. We believe in adjustment and have done exactly that all through the history.
 
Mar 2017
41
Canada
Sea-fearing/Access to trade. Europeans were the internet before there was such a thing.

Having contact and trade with all the other major civilizations meant they had a leg up on information and the latest technology.

They got gun-powder and the magnetic compass from China. But they couldn't immediately conquer China. So shuttled around the world, found societies with less technology and used the resources from those conquests to complete global domination.

But that's no longer the case today. Information is ubiquitous. Asia is back on the rise, India is next. Also forecasting good things for Nigeria, Ethiopia, Ghana and Rwanda if they can stay democratic and peaceful.
 

Bart Dale

Ad Honorem
Dec 2009
7,095
Or why did white people invent the best technology?

What's your theory?
IQ isn't everything. Social institutions, other characteristics such as perserverance, drive, courage, common sense also matter, innovation (which is not just IQ)/

For example, for at least 2 centuries, the whites were the only one sailing around the world. Asians had the same greed, as the common piracy in both India and China showed, but they lacked the drive, the boldness, the courage to face unknown dangers to sail around the world in search of honest profits.

When Cook made his famous voyages, China was still independent, and so was much of India, yet neither India nor China bothered to send Zheng he1s vogayges were not ones or explorataion, despite what is often claimed, He did not go to any place Chinese or their trading partners hadn't already been too.

Or take the telesscope - despite the whites introducing it to the Asians, the Asians made no significant discoveries with it, made no significant improvements on the design, essentially did nothing major with it. It was not lack of money, until the later 19th century, many telescoples with which major doscoveries were made were built by private individuals, such as Herschel - it was lack of interest, not lack of money. Does it take a genius to build a telescope? Not really, but it does take curiosity and interest, which the asians seem to lack.

Or take Ben F;ranklin's experiments on electricity - neither in India nor China does there seem much of a desire to keep abreast of the European discoveries, or trying to duplicate them, In the case of India, Ashoka edicts were out in the open, for anyone who had an interest them to read, yet it wasn't until the white came along that anyone in India had the interest to read them, to ask the questions of who wrote them.
 
Aug 2017
115
Florida
Sea-fearing/Access to trade. Europeans were the internet before there was such a thing.

Having contact and trade with all the other major civilizations meant they had a leg up on information and the latest technology.

They got gun-powder and the magnetic compass from China. But they couldn't immediately conquer China. So shuttled around the world, found societies with less technology and used the resources from those conquests to complete global domination.

But that's no longer the case today. Information is ubiquitous. Asia is back on the rise, India is next. Also forecasting good things for Nigeria, Ethiopia, Ghana and Rwanda if they can stay democratic and peaceful.
But didn't China, Southeast Asia, India, Arabs, Turks, and East Africa all trade with each other in the Indian Ocean for roughly 300 years peacefully before the arrival of the Portuguese?

Then the Portuguese started killing and looting and taking over the place?

Followed by the Dutch, English, French, etc.?

They all had access to each others stuff.
 

cachibatches

Ad Honorem
Mar 2012
2,351
Other related questions would be:

A) Why do Western countries continue to be on the cutting edge of game-changing science and technology, a recent example being the discovery of the Higgs-Boson?

B) Why do white males continue to win a disproportionate number of Nobel prizes in physics and chemistry?

C) Why do whites continue to have disproportionate representation at the highest end of IQ, despite the fact that Asians generally have a higher average mean IQ?


I think there are two things going on here:


1) IQ is overrated. There is no great mystery to intelligence. About 60% of it is mostly environmental and about 40% of it is almost entirely hereditary. There are going to be people with very high capacities for every "race." Whether they reach their fullest potential or not is largely up to the conditions they live under.


2) Western societies are (at least for the moment) places of intellectual freedom, and freedom breeds creativity, which in turn creates innovation and success.
 
Last edited:
Apr 2017
722
Lemuria
What would do you think is more innovative: a lower average IQ but far more diverse population or a higher average IQ but homogeneous population? Which one will produce extremes at a greater rate? Isn't it obvious?
What happen though if the average IQ is too low and the diversity is extremely high? Can that society harness the extremes?
 
Last edited:
Mar 2017
3,238
United States
IQ isn't everything. Social institutions, other characteristics such as perserverance, drive, courage, common sense also matter, innovation (which is not just IQ)/

For example, for at least 2 centuries, the whites were the only one sailing around the world. Asians had the same greed, as the common piracy in both India and China showed, but they lacked the drive, the boldness, the courage to face unknown dangers to sail around the world in search of honest profits.

When Cook made his famous voyages, China was still independent, and so was much of India, yet neither India nor China bothered to send Zheng he1s vogayges were not ones or explorataion, despite what is often claimed, He did not go to any place Chinese or their trading partners hadn't already been too.

Or take the telesscope - despite the whites introducing it to the Asians, the Asians made no significant discoveries with it, made no significant improvements on the design, essentially did nothing major with it. It was not lack of money, until the later 19th century, many telescoples with which major doscoveries were made were built by private individuals, such as Herschel - it was lack of interest, not lack of money. Does it take a genius to build a telescope? Not really, but it does take curiosity and interest, which the asians seem to lack.

Or take Ben F;ranklin's experiments on electricity - neither in India nor China does there seem much of a desire to keep abreast of the European discoveries, or trying to duplicate them, In the case of India, Ashoka edicts were out in the open, for anyone who had an interest them to read, yet it wasn't until the white came along that anyone in India had the interest to read them, to ask the questions of who wrote them.
That and Whites have as equally high an IQ as East Asians on average.
 
Last edited:
Status
Closed