Race and Intelligence: Science's Last Taboo

Comments

1. Lawrence, I'm afraid it may be more positive for us to look at intelligence as being purely influenced by the environment but twin studies and adoption studies from the University of Minnesota in particular show us that monozygotic (genetically identical twins) have much more similar IQs than dizygotic (fraternal) twins. I'm not saying it is completely genetic (then they would have exactly the same IQs) but genetics is undoubtedly a big contributor and the influence of genetics appears to get stronger as we age (perhaps people of certain levels of intelligence seek out similar environments and stimulation?).

   Posted by Danny on 08/02/2010 19:15:47

   Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
2. This documentary shows the unfortuate truth of race and intellgennce. I am going to keep it simple. Just look at the african ecomomy, history(there are no proper ancient civilisation), even the features are primitive. I am not a caucasion and not being racist, simply stating facts.

   Posted by jag on 01/02/2010 02:45:59

   Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
3. Thank you soooo much!! So Much! I am an African young woman living in the Netherlands and I must share this with all of my friends! I study political science and nusiness administration and keep meeting Dutch people who find this extrordinary just because I'm black! They often say that genetically we are less intelligent then them....

   Posted by Carla on 24/11/2009 13:37:40

   Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
4. Great piece of work! I think the conclusion is clear...IQ tests are meant to test understanding of modernity. If we created an IQ test based on how aborigines live, many in the west would fail miserably. As for genetic intelligence...show us the specific gene that contributes to intelligence. They know what gene contributes to my height, my colour etc, why not my intelligence - maybe its because its a cultural issue not a genetic one. Finally, intelligence is so many things, not just memory recall, or recognising a moderm world. Its in music, art, dance, sports, language, etc. 'Scientific' thinking is not the only form of intelligence!

   Posted by Lawrence on 07/11/2009 13:04:29

   Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
5. I amonly 10:37s into the documentary and feel compelled to say that his initial comments are only true - when white society sets the tests and the standards. If the intelligence of white society is so great then why build industries that are killing the very planet that we live on, whereas 'so called less intelligent' folk have always strived to live with the earth and take care of it. We have a big racial divide called the western world where we believe that 'the west' have the answer to everything and try to impose that view on anyone, but when the layers are pulled back it is really about how the west can exploit all around, oil, diamonds, gold, gas, food. Where you have a society that only thinks about itself and how to accumulate more 'stuff' you have a soicety that becomes selfish, arrogant and will do all in it's power to maintain that position regardless of the consequences.

   Posted by symon on 07/11/2009 01:30:54

   Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
6. Excellent. Go Hostos!

   Posted by kiz on 06/11/2009 23:42:19

   Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
7. Thank you thank you for this wonderful, considered and insightful documentary. The only thing I'd add would be a greater exposure of the hypocrisy and laziness behind such intelligence testing. Having failed an IQ test as a child - and several since - I am now a postdoctoral researcher at Oxford University. Setting tests like these for university entrance in the UK, despite all you say about future generational performances, is a step backwards. We are individuals first, and should be divided by interest, ambition and skills. We need not and should not be divided by numbers or skin colour. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8257153.stm

   Posted by Doc on 06/11/2009 21:23:24

   Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
8. I have thoroughly enjoyed watching this documentary on 4oD. And I am grateful that the subject was brought to the forefront. As stated in many of the previous comments, it is the cultural and environmental factors influencing a child that sets the precedence, and hugely determines whether that child has a chance of being successful in life. The government should invest millions raising the awareness to many parents. Especially those who are living in poverty (i.e. permanently not working and on benefit)or those committing crime or under achieving or with low morals; that it doesn't matter what race you are, you are one of the most influential factor in your child's life. The government should make these parents aware that how you are living your life today may be limiting your children's aspirations, abilities, achievement and even their values and morality in the future. That should be the next documentary: How parenting influences a child's future....

   Posted by Sapphire on 06/11/2009 13:47:33

   Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
9. whatever the outcome, it was going to be enviroment cause ommar was basically refusing the even slightest scienctific evidence i think they should have had a person which didnt feel anything towards race.

   Posted by The Fox on 05/11/2009 21:43:57

   Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
10. If black kids feel it is not 'cool; to be smart send them to school in Africa where the kids work so hard to achieve the best grades. My three (white) boys (educated in UK)went to school in Burundi, Africa for a year and it was a wake up call to them on how seriously other kids take education and how hard they are prepared to work at it. One of them was top of his class in a good school in UK in Maths and Physics and was very shocked to find he wasn't top in the same subjects in Burundi. The kids there (some of whom were from an orphanage) had such a desire to succeed and worked so hard they are a joy to see.

    Posted by vc on 05/11/2009 20:32:56

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
11. After having watched the above documentary Findings,Ihave to say,I am of the view that intelligence in terms of race is not pre-determined by race factors, but are an accumulation of natural,nurturing and stereotyical outlooks on society. I believe thatas human beings we are embedded by traits our family carry,or what society imposes or states about us racially. All we have to do, is look at how when a erson does not behave in a way dictated by the racial background they find themselves missunderstood or isolated. Individualism is shpaed by the roots we first establish in early life, when our first roots break the stereotyical mould, i.e asians should have women diligent to the family, can our mind begin to develop. We can create more neural experiences and break out of a mould, create a more intelligent, sohisticated person. In terms of black and white, the brainwashing of white race been supremem has been multifaceted hence many carry the grudge or resentment against being called inferior. Only once you sto looking at colour are you capable of anything, only once you develop your own individual identity can you excell. In terms of the conduct of the research,i think Omaar rooted himself too much within the two opposing sides, without adopting an individual outlook.

    Posted by flavia on 03/11/2009 15:52:47

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
12. After having watched the above documentary Findings,Ihave to say,I am of the view that intelligence in terms of race is not pre-determined by race factors, but are an accumulation of natural,nurturing and stereotyical outlooks on society. I believe thatas human beings we are embedded by traits our family carry,or what society imposes or states about us racially. All we have to do, is look at how when a erson does not behave in a way dictated by the racial background they find themselves missunderstood or isolated. Individualism is shpaed by the roots we first establish in early life, when our first roots break the stereotyical mould, i.e asians should have women diligent to the family, can our mind begin to develop. We can create more neural experiences and break out of a mould, create a more intelligent, sohisticated person. In terms of black and white, the brainwashing of white race been supremem has been multifaceted hence many carry the grudge or resentment against being called inferior. Only once you sto looking at colour are you capable of anything, only once you develop your own individual identity can you excell. In terms of the conduct of the research,i think Omaar rooted himself too much within the two opposing sides, without adopting an individual outlook.

    Posted by flavia on 03/11/2009 15:46:42

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
13. It would have been interesting to examine countries where black students are the majority and the difference this makes to their academic performance. In the Caribbean there has been a historic importance attached to education. The student population of the University of the West Indies is predominantly black. However in the UK the poor or under achievement of Afro-Caribbean students is of concern. The difference is not genetic but environmental and cultural.

    Posted by Nick on 03/11/2009 13:07:01

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
14. The documentary is as interesting as the comments of viewers. I am always worried by the tendency of scientists and researchers to look for mono-causal factor to explain certain phenomena. To reduce intelligence just to race has so many implications in terms of job recruitment, admission into university, immigration policy etc. For many people especially blacks, claiming that intelligence is a function of race tends to suggest that slavery was justified; their deprived and marginalised economic social status is deterministic, and above all they are inferior. I think the underlying assumptions in this debate will always make this topic a taboo one. As a black person, I agree that there is intelligence gap across race as well as amongst race. It is the responsibility of humanity to find and address the multi-factors (rather than just single ones) responsible for this gap. To accept the gap as deterministic is to suggest that the most intelligent race is not intelligent enough to find innovative ways to bridge the intelligent gap. To conclude, I'll say that as slavery is an indictment to so-called Western Civilisation by then, so the thesis that intelligence is only determined by race negates the evolution of human intelligence in general. We need more debate and conclusive research on this topic at all levels until the issue is laid to rest like it did between whether the earth was flat or round. Or maybe the debate is like the evolution versus the intelligent design debate.

    Posted by Murtala Touray on 02/11/2009 14:08:11

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
15. The problem I saw with this documentary was that it was looking for a binary conclusion: genetics or environment. Undoubtedly a large part of the IQ gap is due to environment; at the same time, however, we know that IQ is heritable. While terms like "black" and "white" cover large and certainly heterogeneous groups, it's absurd to assert that there would be no difference in the mean IQs among them, ceteris paribus; if we measured everyone who was well-fed (e.g. their environments were the same) and found "blacks" were an inch taller than "whites" no one would blink an eye. I would have liked to have seen an examination of studies that attempt to control environment factors, rather than an Omaar-mediated argument between two sides presented as polar opposites.

    Posted by John on 01/11/2009 08:10:47

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
16. I missed this episode!!!!! When, if ever, are Channel 4 going to repeat it?

    Posted by wamaish on 31/10/2009 17:40:13

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
17. This documentary annoyed me. Mainly because most of this is common sense. What kind of imbecile do you need to be to believe that these IQ-tests really are a measure of intelligence? How much money do research departments get to come up with: it could also be down to your upbringing? Ask my 12 year old daughter. Some of the most intelligent, witty and 'head screwed on' friends of mine are black African/American and it has never occurred to me to think about whether their intelligence has anything to do with race. My daughter scores very high on these tests - and that has very little to do with actual intelligence - it has a lot to do with the toys she has had and the 'intellectual input'. But there is no doubt on my mind that some of my friends would have higher scores. The brutal, honest truth is that racists are scared. Women are prevented from educating themselves in some countries - for similar reasons. It scares the not so self-confident person. The thought that someone who might just be physically superior, looks good in a yellow shirt and on top of that might be just as intelligent seems to scare people. The real issue behind racism is lack of self-confidence ... and education. I wish I could be with my friends without any fear of saying something wrong, without ever feeling uncomfortable and to be who we are. There is still so much racism around and it can be so subtle. The only solution is to educate white people properly and pull black people out of their 'hole' of low self-esteem. Personally, I feel much more comfortable when I encounter a black police officer, a black council worker, doctor or teacher. Most of the time they are going to be much more sensitive - simply because they have experienced so much prejudice. It is also blatantly obvious that: having poor education being unsuccessful being unhappy having a poor social life having low self-esteem = tendency to become racist. There is no other reason to think like that. Maybe I should work in a university/research institute and get paid for that.

    Posted by Katy on 31/10/2009 00:52:23

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
18. This was disappointing. The conclusion seemed to me to be a cop out although elegant and poetic in its symetry. In his interviews, Omar was defensive on the point of aggressive with those he disagreed with, most of whom were presenting a scientific hypothesis for debate rather than claiming to have the cut and dried answer. That racial achevement is predicated by social circumstance is no news to anyone. This is how evolution works, we are led to believe, entirely defined by environmental circumstance. The programme correctly identified 'race' as a human construct rather than a scientific fact. This is true in generalisations of black and white but not in so far as different people from different places evolve different characteristics. 'Intelligence' being in itself a woolly generalisation of almost equal standing, there was no hope of any conclusion other than the one reached. I did find it interesting that the white scientists seemed to have no problem with the prospect of being genetically less intelligent than Asians, but that the prospect or even possibility of African people having a similar outcome made Omar lose his cool completely. Much of the problem seemed to be an inability to separate science from a generalised racial debate. Discrimination is so ingrained in our society that we can't have this conversation without recourse to the language and history of persecution, something which as a white guy, I arguably have no moral perspective upon.

    Posted by Nick on 30/10/2009 23:14:06

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
19. Interesting that Australian Aborigines score lowest of all in IQ tests. Either still practicing or born within a couple of generations of the last practitioners of the hunter gatherer life style, I imagine their brains are focused on CONCRETE reality. They will see animal tracks and signs of water in the distance of a desert landscape. Perhaps a Chinese or European post graduate, despite reading masses of nature and survival books, could never read the same land well enough to survive. IQ seems to measure the ABSTRACT abilities needed to thrive in academic life, or in a technical society. To judge all human intelligence via IQ is biased and arrogant.

    Posted by Alec on 30/10/2009 16:53:48

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
20. In every area of science dealing with biology it is so far an unlimited problem. That is any diseases still has unlimited discovery times on the horizon even after major series of discoveries because biology is so complex and we do not have the computational technology to model it yet. Even finding a smoking gun gene in alzheimers for example does not lead to full understanding and cures. Its accepted there will be many hurdles to get at the truth. Yet with iq some genes were found, replies to these discoveries interpreted and the subject closed down for political reasons. No researcher can now get resources or permission to touch this subject. Your show did not present the truth, and everybody knew it wouldn’t from the outset. It was predicted by everybody I knew what would happen. I work in neuropsychology, i am jewish and also in the group which suffers racism, so i do some spare time reviews to understand what racism is. I can tell u for sure there is no part of the brain which is dedicated to processing colour differences in skin, because every area of the brain has been taken apart modelled, fMRI’d for function, knockouts created for it etc. A major part of the brain called the striatum does not like any kind of differences at all, and this is connected to the part of the brain which processes social hierarchies. Its all conditioning. If you ask steven rose a question you will get a jewish conditioned answer. I’m jewish so i know whats going on here. If you ask Richard Lewontin about bruce Lahns brain growth genes not existing in sub Saharan Africa you will get the same type of political response. Because these jewish people think that we should not research race specific topics. There are genes for language areas missing in Africans. This may explain why they talk more slowly. Where were these on your program ? You say you wanted to be objective, to get at the truth, yet how do you manage to so skilfully avoid it in your programme. We know this would happen and how it would happen. You talked about IQ contextuality yet you did not talk about slower reaction times between races which was designed to offset contextuality. Of course not. This is not the truth you presented and not the end of the matter. Yes scientists cannot talk to you, and yes scientists are impeded from research. Its important we understand race differences to understand brain function and development. The first casualty of political or self interest agendas is the truth. You are not interested in the truth as you say you are. The subject is still a taboo, and still unanswered. Your progam made things worse because you have misrepresented reality in so many ways i have only touched on a few here. Anonymous scientist

    Posted by Dr harris on 30/10/2009 14:26:22

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
21. Very good programme but I don't think it was stressed enough that these tests are only measuring aptitude to learning that is geared towards scientific and technological society that rates consumerism as one of the highest goals of life. This to me shows the limitations of the tests in that many other qualities of a human being are devalued to the detriment of the whole experience of life.

    Posted by Albalan0779 on 30/10/2009 02:25:54

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
22. I am white European, coming from a South American country, very racist by the way , Brazil, and since I lived in 4 different countries and felt somehow discriminated in all of them by my cultural background or where I come from let?s say suffered a truly xenophobia. This feeling was shocking to me and made me realise how racism hurts and how racist, or let?s say a political correct racist I was in my country towards poorer people or black people or northern people because I was educated like that in a kind of colonial fashion which is basically "I think I am superior but I don?t say anything because sounds bad." Lucky I am to have discovered and lived in different cultures and had suffered this xenophobia. I think a lot about what originate these hate thinkings between different people, races , cultures,accents, regions or whatever. My point of view is that human being is racist by nature, in ranges that varies a lot by the cultural background or the individual sensibility to understand and accept differences. I think the most straightforward way to tackle racism is first admit it and then work towards overcome myths , fears and lack of acceptance. This program is just amazing as a tool in order to opening minds.Well done channel 4!

    Posted by Dario on 30/10/2009 00:45:28

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
23. I have always admired Rageh Omaar's objectivity in the way he conducts his documentaries; in the section where he considered means of assessing relative intelligence,he was very restrained in dealing with the man who, seemingly to prove black inferiority, confidently quoted the very low IQ figures he had found in all 30 of the sub- Saharan countries he had "researched". Many interviewers would have made mincemeat of this IQ expert! Clearly Rageh had to spend much of the available hour in amassing expert explanations of the many factors (environment, nurture, inherited DNA etc) affecting apparently low intelligence. But I was rather disappointed that, in summing up, Rageh didn't repeat what, (earlier in the Race/Intelligence debate), two eminent genetisists humbly admitted: that scientists, who daily discover new hidden wonders in the human brain, are still nowhere near discovering a way of assessing innate intelligence! The archaic IQ tests, which, with a bit of "illegal" coaching, secured me a place in the local Grammar school in 1941, evidently must be replaced as soon as possible by some assessment more scientifically acceptable than juggling with diagnostic jigsaws. And, whatever Science comes up with, will have to be sufficiently credible to convince the most died-in -the -wool racist!

    Posted by Bryan Scott on 30/10/2009 00:32:55

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
24. This program was really good, and pointed out some very good points. But what I would like to know, is where do South Asians come in this. White, Black and Oriental people were all mentioned, but I cannot remember hearing anything about Brown skinned people.

    Posted by Nigar on 30/10/2009 00:19:53

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
25. I have waited for this programme since it was first advertised. I watched with fear, just in case it could possibliy be true - though deep down I knew it could not be. Thank you so much for an intelligent and logical answer. I was truly moved, and my grandchild will be definitely be going to university.

    Posted by elle on 28/10/2009 23:34:54

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
26. Thoroughly enjoyed this series and pleased that the matter of race and intelligence has been finally aired on television today. The series was well structured and excellent presenting by Rageh Omaar. I will definitely be pushing this series to all education establishments I work with to help them develop strategies to close success rate gaps between different groups of learners. Thank you.

    Posted by chetna patel-liburd on 28/10/2009 21:55:21

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
27. I'm so in love with channel 4, I have been for a long time! Channel 4 comissions the best scienctific/sociological documentries that always have a risky but worthy topic and this was no exception. I throughly enjoyed the content.

    Posted by Emma Fletcher on 28/10/2009 21:54:39

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
28. The post from Chops (below) makes some fascinating points multiple intelligences, points which Rageh alluded to but did not quite articulate in the program. It is telling that the the SAT is being used as a proxy for an IQ test when in fact, the whole idea of terming it an SAT was to get away from the notion of IQ and call it what it is: a test of school aptitude. This kind of testing has a place in the education process, but surely the whole idea of a measurable intelligence is somewhat outdated. And if that is the case, much of the theory and raw data which drives work like The Bell Curve is based on false assumptions. It is our concept of intelligence which must be examined and redefined. Especially the idea of relative intelligence between the races.

    Posted by Roberto on 28/10/2009 21:06:56

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
29. There was very little focus within this programme on the reasons for the differences found in the IQ scores between various ethnic groups. As this seems to be the critical point a more detailed examination of the factors involved would have been productive.Unfortunately i did not really feel any clearer regarding this matter having watched the programme.

    Posted by fritz on 28/10/2009 15:51:02

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
30. its all about how much you really want it whoever you are

    Posted by gift on 28/10/2009 14:41:04

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
31. Two points: what struck me about the programme was that blacks take offence if they are considered their intelligence is governed my race. I am white european and according to that study, I am genetically inferior intelligence wise to north east asians, but the difference is that I do not take the slightest offence, in fact I am looking at them with more respect now. point 2: Rageh Omaar said the main reason blacks achieve less is becauise they associate academis achievement with being white. In fact one nice young lad in America was beaten to death by his fellow blacks for just that reason, being good at his studies. You cannot possibly get more racist that that. That's all

    Posted by snoofus on 28/10/2009 13:29:13

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
32. I enjoyed the program immensely and i have had a discussion with friends on this very subject a few months before. My belief was that the races are different. This is definitely not to say one is "better" than the other just that they "generally" are "better" in different fields. I pointed towards the fact that the majority of sprinters are black and that this must indicate a stronger disposition for blacks to be faster runners. similarly i looked at swimming as well for the opposite. This is all with physical attributes so why not with brain potential. I was accused of being racist in suggesting James Watsons views which i had read a few months before but seemed to be persuaded by his views and also based on my life experiences as well. However after watching this program i must say I am much more disposed to looking more at the socio economic background and culture only rather than the race if I was to have this discussion with friends again and in truth my answer would be %u201CI don’t really know%u201D. i would like to say though that I really don’t care as to which race is inheritably more intelligent, I have met genius and morons from all so i very much know it is individual based but if there is a physical difference (that’s a question to answer %u2013 is there!?) then why isn’t there a mental one too. I can appreciate the sensitive nature of the question and the correct sensitive answer %u2013 %u201Cwe are all the same%u201D because an answer other than this can stir up all sorts of negative behaviour from negative people but I would like this part answered. I want the truth dammit! If we are the same %u2013 good! if we are different %u2013 also good! :-) I am very much looking forward to the Are you racist program on Thursday.

    Posted by Johnny on 28/10/2009 13:20:49

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
33. Firstly, I am delighted that this issue was the focus of a documentary. As a white primary school teacher, I teach in a multi-denominational school and live in the very segregated Northern Ireland. I see teachers classify Nigerian pupils as badly behaved, and whilst they mean not to be racist, these teachers are simply ignorant of how to adapt their learning environment to suit all children. I know this wasn't the reason for the programme, but I felt you touched briefly on what is, for me, a massive problem. - What is 'intelligence'? Some notion conjured up 109 years ago? It is time society embraced fully the fact that every brain has strengths and it is up to us as educationalists to promote the intelligences of each child. A child today is written off if they have difficulty in Literacy and/or Numeracy? Why? Does the world really depend on reading and counting? Are their interpersonal skills, oral communication and business acumen not just as important? And let us face it, technology is moving so fast that soon, reading pens will be as widespread as spellcheckers and children with Dyslexic tendencies will no longer be held back. (They should be no different anyway from the child who has dysfunction in Spatial intelligence and cannot read maps or succeed in Art!) Unfortunately even if all educationalists did believe the mantra, 'every child has a talent,' how many really know what this means? Only recently is Howard Gardner's theory of Multiple Intelligences being addressed in training colleges and I can only speak for progress in Northern Ireland, that the schooling system is beginning to make changes to celebrate various intelligences. The movement is infinitesimal, however. Governments need to make the change; primary school classrooms must have small numbers of pupils so teachers can teach to all learning styles, an equitable emphasis must be placed on every subject area, and for goodness sake, get rid of the out-dated, narrow-minded, discriminative IQ tests. I hold views that are controversial in education. What would my colleagues (or more importantly, the parents of children who go through my rooms) throughout the western world think if they heard me say that reading isn't the top of the heap? Or that so-called IQ does not maketh the man? I would like them to know of the child with Dyslexia, Dyscalculia and various other difficulties, who has finely tuned Musical, Interpersonal, Bodily-Kinaesthetic and Naturalist intelligences. It is through these latter areas that this particular child will learn, and if they are nurtured, she will be a success in life. I accept that in today's society, reading is hugely important, as is communication (oral and written). I am a passionate teacher of Language as it has always been a love of my own and I know that not only does it pervade the entire Curriculum, but it is a vehicle for communication, a necessary life-skill. It should not, however, be a tool by which we measure intelligence, to then conveniently classify groups of children into vertical levels of intelligence. Humans have different intelligences, not different levels of intelligences! Perhaps if society caught up with neuropsychology, there would be no issue with Race and Intelligence, as people would understand that Intelligence and IQ are not the same thing and that Binet's intelligence test of 1900 is no longer relevant. Please keep up this important work you are doing.

    Posted by Chops on 28/10/2009 12:52:53

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
34. "Wow" I am blown away by all the information relayed in this programme. Some of my friends did not see it - what a shame! I have never spoken of race, colour or ethnicity to my thre children before but now they are hearing so much about it that it scares me however, I am extremely happy to learn more about what and who I am! Thank channel 4

    Posted by Rhonda on 28/10/2009 10:06:48

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
35. I am training to be a science teacher and strongly believe that aspiration and effort drives excellence both in the school and the workplace. This is aspiration on the part of the pupil, the parent, the teacher and the local community. I also believe that everyone benefits from high achievement in all social groups and I am pleased to see Rageh Omaar tactfully tackling the issue of under-achievement and low aspiration in parts of the Black community. Through his skilful analysis of the science Mr Omaar has shown that the only limit to educational achievement is our ambition as individuals and as a society. What a refreshing programme!

    Posted by Mr Rowan Savage on 28/10/2009 09:25:30

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
36. At last !This prog was just what id wanted. I think that the genetic evidence shows that genes are not half as important as environment , when it comes to acadamic achievement.I always think of my own example - I am white and have only been to college .My mate is black and has a PHD .

    Posted by paul rowlatt on 28/10/2009 00:56:26

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
37. Full marks for tackling the subject, but what a disjointed commentary and conclusion. Probably one hour is far too short a time to tackle questions of this magnitude. As Mathilda notes below, there did seem only superficial consideration of the idea that blacks are genetically predisposed to lower intelligence and then plenty of hearsay evidence on why environmental factors are at the root of underachievement. If serious scientists such as Dr Watson are asserting that there is a racial inequality, it would have been a far more interesting and valuable program to attempt to demolish these assertions. Maybe C4 can commission a whole series on the topic as is not only profound for society but for many individuals within it.

    Posted by Roberto on 27/10/2009 23:33:01

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
38. The reason that Black people tend not to do as well academically, compared to other groups, is that they are not encouraged by their parents or peers. Asian families get nothing but support from all their family and friends. IQ tests are rubbish science and only prove if you are good at puzzles or not.

    Posted by Broken Man on 27/10/2009 19:47:15

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
39. In the beginning of the documentary, I was quite disturbed by some of the findings as a black woman, but as it progressed, it made me open my eyes to the fact that black people do not set high standards for ourselves. We have made it "okay" and acceptable for young black boys to "aspire" to be bling-toting rappers and for young black girls to be "booty-shaking" video girls. A much needed wake up call. The Obama speech at the end wrapped it up well.

    Posted by Vicky on 27/10/2009 19:18:27

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
40. The program was an eye opener but I will like to ask one simple question will the IQ of a white or east asian under privilege kid from a home where there is no premium on education be higher than a middle class black kid (privilege sub saharan kid)who is from a home where the culture of hard work in which academic success is highly rewarded and parents take a highly active interest in the cognitive development of the child ???

    Posted by biz on 27/10/2009 16:55:34

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
41. This show was just about what I'd expected - skillfully avoiding the mass of studies that have repeatedly shown (mainly via interracial adoption studies and MRI studies of brain volumes compared to IQ tests) that IQ is indeed variable between racial groups and is related to brain size, but it DID quote the solo study (which was tiny and deeply flawed) that seemed to point to the desired 'its all made up by racists' message the show was quite obviously pushing from the get go. It manfully misrepresented IQ tests by pretending that the high end sorter used on graduates was in any way resembles the standard IQ tests used on the general public, and which have ZERO relationship to the Raven's matrices (visual puzzles) which are used to test in a culture-neutral way. It's a total myth that IQ test are biased and not an accurate test of overall intelligence- on every occasion this has been claimed it has been proven to be untrue, and it's really only trotted out as an argument now when the race/IQ subject is raised- just about all of America's leading psychologists signed a long letter explaining that IQ tests were't culturally biased and were a good guide to real life intelligence. I'd suggest reading the letters written by Linda S. Gottfredson if you want to see what psychologists really think about race and IQ (Egalitarian Fiction and Collective Fraud) where a study of psychology PHDs showed that the majority of them believed the difference was at least partly genetic, with the 'all environment' supporters being in a notably small minority. The program was so phenomenonally biased that it bordered on the dishonest in its insistence that 'only some' scientists support innate racial differences (actually the majority of psychology professors asked) and that IQ tests are culturally biased/not good measures of real intelligence (also an opinion NOT shared by psychology doctorates or supported by the research into IQ and life outcome, with which I am also familiar). I'd also applaud Dr Watson's common sense on avoiding the show based on the treatment of Lynn and Jensen. They were allowed to voice their opinions, but were forbidden to show any of the mass of evidence that supports them (I'm assuming it was edited out). The presenter then called them racist for holding an opinion which is based on a lot of solid scientific data and which is shared by the majority of professionals in their common subject. I'd also like to comment that 'race isn't real' is very far from being a consensus among geneticists- being familiar with a lot of the papers published post 2000 on the subject I can tell Channel 4 that a LOT of publishing geneticists are supporting the 'race is real' side of the debate (although since this didn't support the drive of the show it was pretended that since Prof Steve Jones didn't support race as a biological reality, all geneticists shared his POV). I'd also like to torpedo the claims that East Asian do better because of their 'studious culture'. East Asian children adopted into White American families show exactly the same higher IQ's as their non adopted culturally Asian cohorts. Also not mentioned was that black children adopted by white families have the same IQ as other black Americans (so much for environment again) and that mixed race black/European children score halfway between the adopted white children and adopted black children- every interracial adoption study shows the same pattern. Also not mentioned was the fact that IQ seems to be about 70% to 80% hereditable, with 'virtual' twins (different children adopted by the same parents at the same time) having a completely unrelated IQ scores- another blow to the 'environment' claims. In all, this show was just a vehicle for Mr Omah's opinion in which scientific evidence to the contrary was scrupulously kept from the public eye and only the few people and single study that supported him were allowed airtime. I was not impressed.

    Posted by Mathilda on 27/10/2009 15:53:03

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
42. IQ tests do not measure imagination, creativity, ingenuity, compassion, humanity or dexterity (qualities that make life worth living) and therefore cannot claim to reflect the sum of all human achievement but an indication of potential. The fact that they are used as fodder for racists to prove the mental superoirity of one race over another is absurd. I would like to know what the academics make of the invention/discovery of the decimal place value system by the dark skinned Indians in the 4th century BC. Right up until the 11th century AD Europeans were using the rather clumsy Roman numerical system. The beautiful and ingenious Indian decimal place value system (which we take for granted) intoduced by Arab merchants into Europe revolutionised Western mathematics and gave the world a universal language which over rides all other languages and ultimately paved the way for industrial and tecnological advancement. I agree that underperformance by Sub Saharan African (and by inference, dark skinned peoples) is based on socio-cutural factors and malnutrition. The fact that these peoples - conquered and subjugated - are some of the poorest in the world is no coincidence.This is basically a racist argument but one which has to be addressed.

    Posted by Claire on 27/10/2009 15:48:57

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
43. This was one of the most foolish programmes I have ever seen. I used to have a lot of respect for Rageh Omaar but this has gone. He had the biggest chip on his shoulder and seem to think that the scientists who suggested a difference in mean intelligence accross the races was a racist lunatic. He seemed to ignore the fact that this man was saying that east asians have the highest mean IQ's, concentrating on the fact whites put themselves above blacks. This is obviously a very plausable theory many genetic aspects, of whic intelligence is one, vary in races. The example questions in the test when she asked him specific knowledge questions was rubbish no such questions are in IQ tests. To suggest that IQ or other tests are weighted against black people is nonsense. Also the fact that many top scientists refused to take part for fear of the reprocussions told its own story, plainly they believe the research and do not want to be seen as racist if they didn't believe the research they would be queing up to dispel the theory. Anyway what is the problem here, we are only talking about average intelligence, plainly there are stupid and very clever individuals within every race, however there will be an average and if the difference is statistically different enough then this will be down to genetics, this is not racist just how it is. Should I then make a programme trying to dispel the myth that black people are better athletes. Of course not because they are for a number of reasons. Those of west African dissent have a higher muscle density, look at the 100m final, those of Ethiopian area dissent are much better long distance runners all this is down to genetics. Channel 4 and especially Ragee Omaar with that massive chip on his shoulder, you should be ashamed of such poor programming that only further fuels racism and does not reduce it.

    Posted by Martin on 27/10/2009 15:24:04

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
44. I would like to congratulate Rageh Omaar on a very professional piece of journalism. I think he's ability to let somebody speak, that has very different views from his own made this a very balanced documentary. I could help enjoying the the irony of watching these sham scientist tell a highly eloquent Somalian that Africans were less intelligent than Europeans.

    Posted by James Cosstick on 27/10/2009 15:02:00

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
45. Mr Omars interpretation regarding the S African scenario of equality of the races is untrue. The former Apartheid has been replaced by a new aparthied under the name of Black Empowerment and Affirmative action ensuring black citizens have priority in jobs and professions, followed by the coloured citizens and then the white citizens. Only last week my brother in law was told he would not get an IT managers post because he is white. Mr Omar spoke of the upsurge in medical students there where priority is chosen on race, and not ability and intelligence, hence the reason why so many medical students are now black which he remarked upon. After 6 years working amongst many races there, the words that will echo always in my mind was from a group of church Pastors commenting on their coloured communities prospects, by saying, before we weren't white enough, now we aren't black enough. Mr Omar, I really do wish you had done your homework for those of those us who supported the Anti-Aparheid movement have been betrayed. Your interpretation of the intelligence aspect in your reasoning on the South Africa black citizens is regrettfully incorrect. Res Ipsa Locquitor

    Posted by Six yrs in Townships S. Africa on 27/10/2009 14:07:51

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
46. I was looking forward to this programme but was inevitably left a little disappointed. I expected to see unbiased studies into differences in our genetic make-up. It's not the fault of the makers of the programme, but due to the poor studies conducted. I suppose I didn't think it through - any investigations into difference in races is going to be fuelled by rascism. And academics investigating academic ability will be holding academia with over-inflated esteem (the notion that black women with low IQ's should be steralised is a poor attempt to use science as a justification for ethnic cleansing - who really holds high IQ as the sole reason for living?!?!). However, I think that to deny that there are differences in races is foolish. We're living in a big brother state if it has got to the point that people are afraid to mention that there are differences between us. NOT STATING THAT ONE IS BETTER THAN THE OTHER, but that we're all different. In the deepest sense, we're all the same. We all want nothing more than to be surrounded by the ones we love, in a safe environment. I think even the most avid rascist would have to admit that. However, it is clear that there are inherit differences between different races. Black people make better sprinters, white people make better swimmers, japanese are good at computer games, chinese at seeing patterns, and so on. I'm not sure what all the stereotypes are. However - I can regularly see why these stereotypes haven't died out - whether it's culture enhanced or genetic. That's not something we should pretend we don't see. But it's also not something we should allow to hold us back. Of course a white person could win the 100m!! And I'm a maths PhD student - and this department is not swarminig with chinese people, in fact - I'm the only one, and I'm only half chinese!! So my rant is saying that we should be able to admit that there are trivial differences between us without fear of being deemed a hateful rascist. It's just a shame that any investigations into such differences are done so by rascists. I suppose they're the type of people who care enough to devote so much time to analysing such superficial qualities.

    Posted by Anon on 27/10/2009 11:12:26

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
47. An interesting and brave approach to a highly sensitive topic. However it was slightly disappointing that the programme didn't delve further into why East Asians seem to outperform all other races in the IQ test; can this simply be down to Confucian ideology? In looking at IQ, it went on to state that nurture plays the greatest role and implied that performing well is linked to household income/class/opportunity. However it missed the fact that many East Asian households are not Middle Class or wealthy and that indeed many East Asians live in the West (and therefore may not hold those Confucian views) so unfortunately it didn't really answer why they perform better academically.

    Posted by Jenny on 27/10/2009 10:47:12

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
48. Full marks to the programme and Rageh Omaar. Science literature seems to suggest all abilities have both environmental and genetic components, therefore I would be deeply surprised if intelligence were a complete exception. Perhaps the million dollar question is how significant is the genetic contribution? Genetics professor Steve Jones correctly pointed out that racial genetic difference is miniscule. Also Jones' book [The Single Helix, p74], suggests a significant gentic contrubution to the very great range of general human IQ. Put these two facts together and it is no surprise to find the genetic variation between 'races' is swamped by the variation within 'races' and the vast majority of the IQ bell curves are overlapping. Time to get controversial: It is only at the extremes of the bell curve graphs that genetically influenced ability seems to stick out like a sore thumb. The elite Berkeley entrants in the programme clearly showed the east Asians statistically top the rankings. An uncomfortable comparison is genetically endowed running speed (which may well carry a larger genetic influence than IQ.) With the exception of a Chinese hurdler, the east Asians aren't known for top running speed, but the west African Americans dominate. East Africans dominate the long distance but are nowhere in the top sprinters, so skin colour par se is not the causation, rather the genetic difference within populations. I am actually comfortable with the scenario of genetic variation in IQ. I think it could be potentially worse to be told that an underachievement has more to do with cultural laziness, than an inbuilt factor over which I had limited control. However, any statistical comparisons are of course expressed as probability of a trait within a population and cannot be deterministic of an individual:- I strongly refute any correlation between my job involving much heavy lifting and my 'race' regularly winning the world strongman contest. I am a Viking!

    Posted by Whitevanman on 27/10/2009 09:59:07

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
49. Your show was spot on last night!.I used to work as a police officer in africa and moved to england in 2001.I work in a smiliar role as a PCSO in manchester and i was shocked initially on the proportion of minorities who are offenders v/v population.I realised that culture (local)played a signficant role in how local minorities grow up.I remember back when i started,i used to be called "whitey".I was not offended but i felt sorry about their perception that people who work within the police force should/were white!.Even I,brought and raised in Africa,found that so pathetic.There is a lot to be done to change the mindest of young people residing in certain areas to change the perspective on t heir abilities in life.What i also found that was the chances of success amongst the minorities that i polce were very low because they have a low opinion of themselves and the natural course of action in their lives seems to be venturing into crime.Fantastic show.Wish they could teach that in schools

    Posted by keith on 27/10/2009 09:29:20

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
50. Rageh Omaar's sensitive approach to a subject that should not exist, mental superiority of one race over another because of colour, finally identified two things: IQ or SAT are white middle class designed and therefore look to maximising the white middle class, secondly, nurture ultimately raises the bar. IQ never considers for example that people who receive little or no formal schooling may have skills in survival and bushcraft, or a mental ability wholly unexploited by white midle class. Nurture on the other hand, is demonstrated by the fall in the Middle East from being the great mathematicians pre-middle ages, to what Genghis Khan left behind. It are the values of the 'race' or 'people' such as value of knowledge in the Chinese, that sets their nurture patterns. We know that there are three streams of homo sapiens, each physically slightly different from the other. Fortunately as we interbreed these clear differences are being watered down. BUT they have nothing to do with mental ability! My Indonesian friends have developed physically differently because they live in a hot, tropical country and have different conditions to me as a European. This does not make them less intelligent. On the contrary, they have developed faster and better than their European couterparts, from my personal experience. Mr Omaar need never fear that because he originates from the continent of Africa, he and the Somali people are any less intelligent, clever or superior than any other person on this planet. A thought provoking propramme which avoided pandering to the usual steriotypes. My congratulations to all involved.

    Posted by de LEON on 27/10/2009 08:10:55

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
51. Written a by A Black Woman (I feel I need to say this at the outset as the response to this issue will partly depend on your race - there is inherent bias). Fact: if you test IQ differences between different races, you will find that there is a difference between the races with on average East Asians scoring higher than whites and whites, in turn, scoring higher than blacks. I do not not understand why it is not blatantly obvious to everyone that this fact is not driven by race at all but is primarily driven by a complex mix of two factors: income and culture. Income. Let's go into the household of the average sub-Saharan African home. This is what we will find: no running water and electricity, no radio or TV, no fridge or cooker, no dishwasher or washing machine and in some case, even no food. Factor number 1 in IQ differences will definitely be food. If you test IQ difference between 2 otherwise identical people where one person is hungry and possibly suffering from Malnutrition the well-fed person should generally score better. Hence, before testing the data, I would expect to find that African regions that are self-sufficient in food will have an average IQ higher than famine prone areas. As income rises, you can afford running water and electricity hence reading stories and playing games with your children that will build their IQ becomes an option. A little more income and you can afford a radio which arguably increases knowledge. A little more income and you can afford a fridge so you don't have to send your kids to the market every day (while you, the parent, is tending to the farm) for fresh food because you can store food (milk, meat, veg etc) for several days. A little more income and you can afford a cooker thus reducing time spent cooking on wood/coal stoves and allowing you to invest more time in your children's education. You get the idea. When I was 8, growing up in a wealthy African home, I went to the best international school in my town and after school, my mum picked me up in a car and at home I would find lunch on the table. After lunch, I spent ages reading books and had access to satellite TV. Our houseboy's daughter walked home from school and had many chores to do (including making her own lunch) before she could play and in the evening she would cook dinner for her family of 5 on a log-fired stove that she lit up herself!! She had radio access but limited / no access to any other electronic gadgets. An IQ test would arguably have shown that I had the higher IQ....but did I? She could fend for a family of 5, I completely lacked those skills. So, income should lead to a paradigm shift in IQ especially if you are lacking basics such as food. However, I believe that beyond a certain level income plays no role. Culture needs to be thrown into the mix. East Asians have a culture of hard work and even within the family parents tend to push their children more, academically, than either white or black parents. Academic achievement is held in very high regard and as a child trying to please the parent you will try hard at developing or mental capabilities (school). I did not grow up in an Asian household but growing up, I could see that on average my Asian peers were under more parental pressure to outperform. So, with no empirical data. I conclude by saying that higher income should shift the IQ bell curve to the right but to get a further shift, you need a culture of hard work in which academic success is highly rewarded and parents take a highly active interest in the cognitive development of their offspring.

    Posted by Heather Katsonga-Phiri on 27/10/2009 06:11:37

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
52. I am really happy that this kind of material is finally on TV and I think it is a good starting point. but I believe the arguement was a bit one sided which is understanding due to the sensitivity of the matter. in any case thank you and would like to see more like this.

    Posted by Parham on 27/10/2009 03:07:30

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
53. This was an informative, sensible and balanced documentary, and a credit to the people who worked on it. I only hope we can learn BOTH the lessons which it brought out - ie. not only "it is not the colour of your skin which determines how smart you are" but also "we need to review our social and educational policies and practices so that everyone can be as smart and successful as they can be" - in other words, let's GET OVER racism once and for all, please! There is hard work to be done, in all of the many countries and communities of the world, to maximise our potential as the human race...

    Posted by Herodotus_S_F on 27/10/2009 02:03:54

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
54. I would like to know if it is possible to get a copy of this documentary and the conditions that would have to be met to have it. I would also like to have every other item in this episode. Thank you

    Posted by Anele on 27/10/2009 01:18:17

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
55. Excellent and very brave programme. I wonder want the reponse would be had a) The programme said blacks were stronger and faster or b) a white man written it

    Posted by Bucko on 27/10/2009 00:13:25

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
56. A well constructed, but ultimately limited documentary - the conclusion towards a significant environmental/socio-economic causation of intelligence was predictable. The missed opportunity was to significantly interrogate those that claimed tests proved a race gap. Did they not consider that the structure of the tests themselves led to performance differences? Did they not sense that it would have been quite possible to coach black groups to much better scores? And, above all, why were they pursuing this question - what agenda were they fulfilling? Now those would be questions that would strip this debate to its rawest bones.

    Posted by Andrew Wilson on 27/10/2009 00:06:55

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
57. I just watched the Race and Intelligence programme. The "professor" who stated that African-Americans are not as genetically intelligent as European, is talking absolute stuff and nonsense. There are intelligent and less intelligent people in ALL races. Some may breeze through their exams, others may have to apply themselves a little more but they will still pass because they want to. Environment and perspective is key to how much a student, regardless of race, will achieve and the professor spouting his alternative views would be called a blasphemous-out-of-touch-old-man were he talking about religion. What a cheek! If a student's upbringing is filled with support, encouragement, love, positive mental and physical stimulation, his parents leading by example, "the sky's the limit" teachings, etc, etc, they will do exceptionally well regardless of their race. If their background is poverty stricken, a broken home, no strong role model, underachievement from all around them, obstacles from every direction (especially from society as a whole), stress and disappointment from a very young age, of course the student will feel disadvantaged and act accordingly. I know a young African-Caribbean man who didn't apply himself at school. He bunked off, chased girls, didn't study and only achieved 1 qualification when he left: A Level Maths, grade A. I rest my case.

    Posted by Mo on 26/10/2009 23:06:34

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
58. Rageh Omar did a good job with this contentious subject. The last sequence, where we saw the South Bronx Academy at work and how good teachers can lift pupils' aspirations, was inspiring. The next thing we need is a better measure of human potential- IQ doesn't cut it. What about imagination; determination; creativity; dexterity; compassion... aren't these as important or more? And what if we could agree to focus on individuals without reference to their anthropological classification?

    Posted by Rayh on 26/10/2009 22:42:12

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
59. What an amazing tv show. Very impressed. Very interesting.

    Posted by kstar on 26/10/2009 22:23:31

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
60. I dont believe that IQ is the key to do well in life for no human being, the color of your skin doesnt count but I do agree that to have success in your goal life is important your enviarioment where you grow and most definite is important your emocional intellegence. There is a book of Daniel Goleman I highly recommend it.

    Posted by Katz on 26/10/2009 22:10:03

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
61. IQ is not the same as intelligence. It is a measure of compatability with a particular world view. Nothing more.

    Posted by herbing on 26/10/2009 21:24:09

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment