This information may come from a VERY Politically INCORRECT source,
but since the British Isles have never been one to speak well of Italy,
and this report does, I choose to give it some credence.
It does not treat Southerners (I assume this includes Southern Italians), or Catholics well, but ITALY in general, fares exceptionally well.
Italy scored 102, tied with Germany, Austria, and Netherlands. There are some interesting and suprising scores.
Hong Kong is top rated (107) , South Korea (106), Japan (105), North
Korea 105),
Taiwan (104), ITALY (102), Germany, (102), Austria (102), Netherlands
(102),
Switzerland (101), Sweden (101), China (100), United Kingdom (100),
Belgium (100), Poland (99), Spain (99), USA (98), France (98), Czech (97),
Canada (97), Russia (96), Israel (94), Ireland (93), Greece (92)....
The Full List of 104 countries is available at:
Title Or << http://fp.rlynn.plus.com/pages/article_intelligence/t4.htm
>>
The Lynn Report, The Summary, The Introduction, and Lynn's Profile in Excerpt Form Follows:
The Entire Report can be found at:
Title Or << http://fp.rlynn.plus.com/pages/article_intelligence/1.htm
>>
==========================================================
Intelligence and the Wealth and Poverty of Nations
RICHARD LYNN
University of Ulster, Coleraine, Northern Ireland
TATU VANHANEN
University of Helsinki, Finland
SUMMARY.
National IQs assessed by the Progressive Matrices were calculated for
60 nations and examined in relation to per capita incomes in the late 1990s
and to post World War Two rates of economic growth. It was found that national
IQs are correlated at with real GDP (Gross Domestic Product) per capita
1998 and, with per capita GNP (Gross National Product) 1998; and with the
growth of per capita GDP 1950-90 and with growth of per capita GNP 1976-98.
The results are interpreted in terms of a causal model in which population
IQs are the major determinant of the wealth and poverty of nations in the
contemporary world.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
INTRODUCTION The causes of the inequalities in income and wealth between
nations have been discussed for some two and a half centuries. In 1748
Montesquieu published De l'Esprit des Lois in which he proposed that temperate
climates were more favorable to economic development than tropical climates.
In 1776 this problem was discussed by Adam Smith in his Wealth of Nations,
in which he proposed that the skills of the population are the principal
factor responsible for national differences in incomes and wealth.
Since these early attempts to analyse this problem, numerous other
theories have been advanced. These theories fall into four principal categories.
First, climatic theories are still proposed. Their leading exponent in recent times is Kamarck (1976) who argues that tropical climates are unfavorable for economic development because the heat and humidity reduce the efficiency of working capacities, impair the productivity of the land and provide a favorable environment for debilitating diseases. This explains the difference between what is sometimes called "the rich north" with its temperate climate and "the poor south" with its predominantly tropical climate. Diamond (1998) presents similar arguments on the crucial significance of climatic and geographical factors.
The Second major contemporary explanation is "dependency theory". This proposes that the economically developed capitalist nations are responsible for the poverty of the underdeveloped nations because they dominate the world economy, force the rest of the world into economic dependency, and pay low prices for Third World agricultural products and natural resources. Some of the leading exponents of this theory are Frank (1969, 1996), dos Santos (1993, 1996), Wallerstein (1998) and Valenzuela and Valenzuela (1998); see also Seligson and Passˇ-Smith (1998).
Third, there is the neoliberal theory. This proposes that the major factor responsible for national differences in economic development consists of the presence of free markets as opposed to command, socialist and communist economies. Bates (1993) and Weede (1993) are leading recent exponents of this theory.
Fourth, there are a variety of psychological theories which argue for the importance of differences in attitudes, values and motivations. The first major theory of this kind was Weber's (1904) theory that the Protestant work ethic explained the more rapid economic development of northern Europe as compared with the Catholic south from the sixteenth century onwards. Later theorists in this tradition include McClelland (1976) who advanced the similar concept of achievement motivation. Several economists, while not endorsing the theories of Weber or McClelland, are sympathetic to this kind of explanation and propose what are generally termed "cultural" factors as major contributors to national differences in economic development. Landes writes of the importance of culture "in the sense of inner values and attitudes that guide a population" (1998, p. 516). Many economists have taken eclectic positions in which they argue that several of these factors contribute to national differences in incomes and wealth.
We believe it has never been suggested that national differences in
intelligence might play some role in national differences in economic development.
It is widely assumed that the peoples of all nations have the same average
level of intelligence. For instance, Kofi Annan, the United Nations Secretary
General, asserted in April 2000 that intelligence "is one commodity equally
distributed among the world's people" (Hoyos and Littlejohns, 2000). It
is known in psychology that this is incorrect and that there are large
differences in average levels of intelligence between different nations.
Reviews of the literature have shown that in relation to average IQs of
100 in Britain and the United States, the peoples of north east Asia have
average IQs of around 105 and the peoples of sub-Saharan Africa have average
IQs of around 70 (Lynn, 1991).
In view of these differences, it seems a reasonable hypothesis that
national differences in intelligence may be a factor contributing to national
differences in wealth.......
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Profile of Richard Lynn
Richard Lynn, Professor Emeritus, University of Ulster
Research Interests:
Intelligence, Sex Differences, Race Differences, Eugenics
Graduated in psychology at the University of Cambridge and worked as
lecturer in psychology at the University of Exeter, professor of psychology
at the Economic and Social Research Institute, Dublin, and at the University
of Ulster. Most of his work has been on intelligence.
In 1983 he published a paper in Nature showing that the IQ in Japan had increased over the course of the previous half century, a phenomenon now known as the Flynn Effect following the demonstration by Jim Flynn of secular increases in intelligence in number of countries.
In 1989 he proposed that the increases in intelligence have been caused by improvements in nutrition.
Lynn has also published several papers showing that intelligence is associated with brain size and reaction times. His work on intelligence and brain size led me to consider the problem that women have smaller brains than men even when allowance is made for their smaller bodies. This implies that men should have higher average IQs than women, but it has been universally asserted that men and women have equal average IQs. In 1994 I proposed that the solution to this problem is that girls mature faster than boys and this compensates for their lower IQs, which only appear at the age of 16 onwards. Among adults men have higher average IQs than women by about 4 IQ points. This advantage consists largely of higher spatial abilities but is also present in non-verbal reasoning.
His major discovery is that the Oriental peoples of East Asia have higher average intelligence by about 5 IQs points than Europeans and peoples of European origin in the United States and elsewhere. His first published finding in 1977 in a paper on the intelligence of the Japanese. In subsequent years the high Oriental IQ has been confirmed in numerous studies of Oriental peoples in Hong Kong, Taiwan, South Korea, China, Singapore and the United States.
In 1991 he extended my work on race differences in intelligence to other
races. He concluded that the average IQ of blacks in sub-Saharan Africa
is approximately 70.
It has long been known that the average IQ of blacks in the United
States is approximately 85. The explanation for the higher IQ of American
blacks is that they have about 25 per cent of Caucasian genes and a better
environment. The theory advanced to explain these race
differences in IQ is that when early humans migrated from Africa into Eurasia
they encountered the difficulty of survival during cold winters. This problem
was especially severe during the ice ages. Plant foods were not available
for much of the year and survival required the hunting and dismembering
of large animals for food and the ability to make tools, weapons and clothing,
to build shelters and make fires. These problems required higher intelligence
and exerted selection pressure for enhanced intelligence, particularly
on the Orientals.
His book Dygenics showed that the eugenicists were right in their belief that modern populations have been deteriorating genetically in respect of health, intelligence and the personality trait of conscientiousness. This deterioration began in the second half of the 19th century and has continued up to the present.
His book Eugenics considers what measures could be taken to rectify
this and discusses the genetic future of mankind.....
