Despite of some imperfections of IQ test, the very fact that there is a clear difference amongst scores of different racial groups shows that hierarchy does exist, albeit the importance here not being the order of hierarchy.
...
Here comes the race. Admitting it is the right attitude for sciences; denying it is the right attitude for Political Correctness.
The point you raised
per se is well taken.
However, I am simply not aware of any large scale, representative IQ testings undertaken across large strata of mainland Chinese population - or South Asian population for that matter. If you know of concrete evidence to the contrary, I'd appreciate you pointing out the source for the benefit of my knowledge.
I think we can agree that the average IQ of NA Orientals is no more representative of all Chinese in the PRC than the IQs of Seyyeds represent those of Muslims, or the Brahmans' represent the "Indics".
One can't even entirely credibly argue that Japanese average IQ is representative of East Asian IQs any more than the Finnish average represents those of the European Caucasians.
Looming far larger and more pertinent is the point of view, implicitly raised by
paritosh, that questioned the
relevance of IQ testing in approximating intelligence.
Blacks are "inherently" more muscular - okay, many can buy that. But are they necessarily more athletic? Only if one accepts that muscle-strength dependent activities are the best representation of "athleticism".
If you do not implicitly accept that activities such as sharp-shooting, those that involve swimming, riding, or otherwise high degrees of hand-eye coordination or bodily flexibility are "second-tier", then you'd be on solid ground to challenge the view that Blacks are more "athletic".
The point implied by
paritosh is that racial/ethnic difference in intelligence is less objectively captured by IQ testing than, say, difference in muscular strength is captured by myometry.
A 10-point difference on IQ score may represent a difference in "attitude" toward testing-taking and a willingness to concentrate on a (sit-down) task far more than a divergence in genuine "smartness" - however "wishy-washy" the latter concept may be.
East Asians may well have an edge on the above partially heritable character traits, given the right environment. This "advantage", in my dictionary, falls under the broader category of "emotional intelligence". And this whole concept of EQ/EI is apparently far more predictive of "worldly successes" (in a
petit bougeoir sense) than IQ could ever hope to be.
In the same token, practically every spelling-bee in NA is a neuro-surgeon wannabe South Asian kid. They are neither aspiring - nor do I, as a neutral observer, believe these kids have what it takes - to be the next Tagore (泰戈尔
. And who here believes Tagore would have been a spelling bee?
We can also discuss the areas of EQ/EI where Orientals may be apparently deficient - but this is hardly the time and place.