I went to high school in a 99.99% white, redneck small town. Being a nerdy geek would get you teased and harrassed mercilessly, but simply having top grades would not draw any sort of flack. Out of the top 10 students in the class, I doubt any of them experienced any significant bullying or teasing for being "smart". I certainly didn't, and I was second in my class.
Scientific Careers and Race
There are a very small percentage of geniuses from every race, culture, and gender. But to think that the only thing that separates one person from another is education, culture, and opportunity is wishful thinking and naive. It's not true in athleticism and it's not true in intellectualism either. And that is the politically incorrect answer.
Racial distinctions are a result of varying evolutionary histories between the different races. If appearances can differ by race, it is possible for elements of personality and intellectual capacity to vary as well. So we shouldn't automatically assume that people from different races have the same ability to contribute towards science, even if they are given the same opportunities to. If you do believe that, you need evidence for it.
" Bring education into your culture. Instill a desire of success in the children of your race.
Complaining alone does nothing productive...Doing something about it does.."
Uh yeah, been doing that. All of my kids are readers and do well in school. My husband and I expect good grades and conduct from our kids and have done our best to place our children in good schools that expect excellence too. You're preaching to the choir as far as me and mine are concerned. My question was why is this "education is for white folks" attitude still prevalent in the black community? I, a black person, have never understood why it is so.
Oh geez, we got "The Bell Curve" premise going on above. Oh, let me tell my kids not to go into the science cuz since they are black their brain just aren't equipped to handle that kind of knowledge. I can just see my kids giving the wtf look cuz mom just lost her ever loving mind.
Just because we find something unpleasant or upsetting doesn't mean that it isn't true. Instead we should base our beliefs on evidence, not emotion. That's what science is.
Uh huh, just because you believe it (and I feel sorry that you do) don't make it true.
It's not true in athleticism and it's not true in intellectualism either. And that is the politically incorrect answer.
For intellectualism---this thought has been blasted out of the water by anthropologists. Not only politically incorrect, but just incorrect.
For athleticism----mostly blasted out of the water. I had to read a fairly in depth study, and was surprised to find that with certain sports, certain groups did tend to excel. But this was based on inherited traits that were more prevalent with a group. So for certain type of track events, there are athletes from one area that inherit a certain muscle length that just gives them an advantage. (I will try to find the details) This is NOT the 'white man can't' jump' nonsense, but is very specific, and applies to the trait, not the race, but a trait that tends to be concentrated within a certain group which would usually be considered the same race. If they were to have children with someone of a different background, then the trait may be passed on, and if that happens for enough generations, it would not be related to race anymore. Its more related to geography and gene flow.
There has never been any significant differences in brains.
Oh geez, we got "The Bell Curve" premise going on above.
YEPPERS! A complete work of trash.
Razziel and Stapler: please notice that we're not talking about INDIVIDUALS but about GROUPS. I suppose it is clear for anyone that some individuals are specially gifted while the rest of us, simply put, just aren't.
But, talking about "GROUPS", I would like to point out that the Ancient Greeks seem to have been particularly gifted people, while today's Greeks would not give that impression. Italians were superb doing the Middle Ages, but they don't have another Leonardo these days. It is unbelievable now, but at some point people seriously thought that Mexico was well ahead of the United States - and it was. I suppose the gene pool was roughly the same in Greece and Italy then as it is now. I think that "nurture" has a lot to do with how the group you belong to develops over time. You may be naturally very smart, but if the right environment does not exist that will help you develop that intelligence, then your intelligence will die with you.
I can but remember a very touching real story, that of Frederick Douglass. If I remember correctly, he was a slave, and his mistress decided she would teach him how to read and write. But then someone pointed out just how wrong that would be since Douglass was a slave, and the lessons came to an end - but not Douglass' thirst for knowledge. He knew he would be punished if the whites found out he could read, so he concealed his progress. Eventually, however, he found he had something that the poor white boys he sometimes played with didn't: food. He was a slave, but his master's table was always full, while those boys were not always sure they would eat. So he traded food for knowledge from those white boys. You'd say that those white boys were at an advantage, but they personally weren't as smart or as desirous of improving their lot as Douglass was.
Had Douglass never found a way to learn how to read and write, his intellect would have never shown.
In Sweden, they are teaching their young to feel at home with globalization. Everyone speaks good English and many of them do attend college. They have access to all the perks of modern life. The dumbest Swede can do a lot. I don't think that is true of Nepal, say. The smartest Nepali may be among us, but she's probably stuck at home, looking after her siblings.
I'm afraid that South Korea is well ahead of Argentina, for example. South Koreans are very much used to working extremely hard and competing with everyone. Argentinians are not used to that. Their performance is generally lower.
dgp - I was talking about groups as well. Of course not every individual in a group is similar to the average for that group. For example women tend to be shorter than men, but that doesn't mean that there aren't tall women or short men. My understanding is similar to NewChapter's who has explained in more precise terms what we might call a racial trait.