What do you think?
Rate this book
IQ and the Wealth of Nations
Lynn and Vanhanen test the hypothesis on the causal relationship between the average national intelligence (IQ) and the gap between rich and poor countries by empirical evidence. Based on an extensive survey of national IQ tests, the results of their work challenge the previous theories of economic development and provide a new basis to evaluate the prospects of economic development throughout the world.
They begin by reviewing and evaluating some major previous theories. The concept of intelligence is then described and intelligence quotient (IQ) introduced. Next they show that intelligence is a significant determinant of earnings within nations, and they connect intelligence with various economic and social phenomena. The sociology of intelligence at the level of sub-populations in nations is examined, and the independent (national IQ) and dependent (various measures of per capita income and economic growth rates) variables are defined and described. They then provide empirical analyses starting from the 81 countries for which direct evidence of national IQs is available; the analysis is then extended to the world group of 185 countries. The hypothesis is tested by the methods of correlation and regression analyses. The results of statistical analyses support the hypothesis strongly. The results of the analyses and various means to reduce the gap between rich and poor countries are discussed. A provocative analysis that all scholars, students, and researchers involved with economic development need to confront.
320 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 2002
About the author
Richard Lynn
47 books91 followersBritish Professor Emeritus of Psychology, who is known for his views on racial and ethnic differences.
Lynn was educated at Cambridge University. He has worked as lecturer in psychology at the University of Exeter, and as professor of psychology at the Economic and Social Research Institute, Dublin, and at the University of Ulster at Coleraine.
Most of his books are about the differences of IQ between different etnicities.
Lynn was educated at Cambridge University. He has worked as lecturer in psychology at the University of Exeter, and as professor of psychology at the Economic and Social Research Institute, Dublin, and at the University of Ulster at Coleraine.
Most of his books are about the differences of IQ between different etnicities.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews
June 11, 2013
This is one of the few books in the market that conduct the studies of Intelligence of people in certain regions vis a vis the others. It is very eastern asian centric, and it is likely to draw criticism from many people for what it is trying to convey within its data. It is a taboo afterall to talk openly about the superiority of certain "races" without being branded as racist even in a liberal democracy like the UK.
October 10, 2024
-A metodologia utilizada é a mesma pra todos os países
-A métrica é literalmente centímetro peniano
-isso tem uma média alta nesse site
Pelo amor de Deus porra
-A métrica é literalmente centímetro peniano
-isso tem uma média alta nesse site
Pelo amor de Deus porra
January 23, 2020
It’s an interesting dissertation as to how people’s lives are affected by their intelligence. It’s interesting to know the kind of actions & decisions we make are limited by our mental capacities which are also determined to a certain point by the surrounding environment (e.g., nutrition, education, and family environment), but to a larger extent by our genetic make-up inherited from our parents.
I already knew from previous IQ studies that there is a clear separation between the major ethnic groups (i.e., Mongoloid, Caucasian, and Negroid) in terms of cognitive levels, but I didn’t know that the Mongoloid group IQ mean ranges between 106-110, the Caucasian group around 100 (standard deviation: 15) and the Negroid group with an overall mean ranging between 75-80.
Additionally, being myself a Latino and knowing that the overall mean for Latinos is approx. 96 is gratifying to know that I can improve my score by simply studying hard. However, I just don’t believe the theory that the recorded low IQ scores for those who live in tropical regions are merely explained by the tropical conditions that hinder us. I've lived in Central America all my life and have a B.S. in agronomy, plus an MSc and a Ph.D. in plant breeding which I completed in a foreign language.
Not that I want to boast about it, but when I compared my academic achievements to those of my peers, I realize that I’m way ahead of many of them which confirm, at least for me, that we’re not all equals. At least not from an intelligence standpoint.
Unfortunately, as the author stated those with higher IQs tend to reproduce less and the ones with lower IQs tend to multiply more. Even worse, in our societies, those with lower IQs are the bulk of the population who not only decide who our authorities are to be but also (because of the lack of motivation, creativeness, and hard work orientation) constitute a major burden to our economy since they prefer to watch TV (soap operas) or play football soccer than to work, exercise or read a book.
Therefore, it is not surprising that countries in this region are impoverished and scientifically, and technologically left behind. Additionally, because of the lack employment, good sanitary conditions, high crime rates, diseases and many other factors currently affecting third world countries a lot of people decide to travel in caravans towards the USA in search of the American dream, but once they reach the Mexican-American border all they find is the American nightmare.
I already knew from previous IQ studies that there is a clear separation between the major ethnic groups (i.e., Mongoloid, Caucasian, and Negroid) in terms of cognitive levels, but I didn’t know that the Mongoloid group IQ mean ranges between 106-110, the Caucasian group around 100 (standard deviation: 15) and the Negroid group with an overall mean ranging between 75-80.
Additionally, being myself a Latino and knowing that the overall mean for Latinos is approx. 96 is gratifying to know that I can improve my score by simply studying hard. However, I just don’t believe the theory that the recorded low IQ scores for those who live in tropical regions are merely explained by the tropical conditions that hinder us. I've lived in Central America all my life and have a B.S. in agronomy, plus an MSc and a Ph.D. in plant breeding which I completed in a foreign language.
Not that I want to boast about it, but when I compared my academic achievements to those of my peers, I realize that I’m way ahead of many of them which confirm, at least for me, that we’re not all equals. At least not from an intelligence standpoint.
Unfortunately, as the author stated those with higher IQs tend to reproduce less and the ones with lower IQs tend to multiply more. Even worse, in our societies, those with lower IQs are the bulk of the population who not only decide who our authorities are to be but also (because of the lack of motivation, creativeness, and hard work orientation) constitute a major burden to our economy since they prefer to watch TV (soap operas) or play football soccer than to work, exercise or read a book.
Therefore, it is not surprising that countries in this region are impoverished and scientifically, and technologically left behind. Additionally, because of the lack employment, good sanitary conditions, high crime rates, diseases and many other factors currently affecting third world countries a lot of people decide to travel in caravans towards the USA in search of the American dream, but once they reach the Mexican-American border all they find is the American nightmare.
October 5, 2023
Compelling thesis and worth investigating the role of intelligence in development. No real discussion of parasite load, some very iffy numbers for IQ based on test samples, and some countries have made-up data that’s derived from nearby averages. Read Lynn’s more recent works on this issue.
March 18, 2026
This book demands a rebuttal. Where is it?
Our society forms social policy, most recently the Supreme Court's decision on affirmative action in Michigan, on the premise that all racial groups are equal. Not Lincoln's "all men are equal under the law" but "all men are equal".
We observe inequality in every aspect of life, most notably educational achievement and financial status. If, as society assumes, all people are equally capable of achievement, there has to be a conspiracy holding some peoples down. And what is it? White racism, they say, as if it could not be more obvious. Well hidden, but still manifest in "low expectations" and "subtle disparagement" etc. We white guys have broad shoulders, but jeez, it gets old after a while. Blacks and liberals have such low opinions of our fundamental morality, we descendants of the abolitionists who freed the slaves and were active partners of the NAACP over the years. It could start to affect our self esteem.
A similar conspiracy theory appears at the international level. African countries supposedly remain poor because they have been exploited by more advanced nations. Their attempts at industrialization supposedly fall victim to greedy foreign companies through a scheme of "globalization" that values them only for their raw materials and cheap labor. Just as the racism theory holds that we white guys are in cahoots to hold minorities down, this one assumes an evil alliance among large companies and advanced countries to depress the market value of the labor and raw materials produced by developing countries. Oppression is a rhetorical staple at the U.N.
It has been almost 10 years since "The Bell Curve" appeared. Since that time many other books have appeared that appear to support its arguments that peoples are different in statistically significant ways, among them "IQ and the Wealth of Nations", "The g factor," "Race, Evolution and Behavior," "Genes, Peoples and Languages," and Steven Pinker's "The Blank Slate."
As Pinker so eloquently reports, these books have been vilified by academics. Typical is Peter Irons writing in "Jim Crow's Children" that "virtually all reputable scholars reject claims, most recently leveled by Richard Herrenstein and Charles Murray.." or Hugh Price disparaging "scientifically discredited" theories of intelligence in "Achievement Matters" or Tom Wicker writing in "Tragic Failure" that "...the Bell Curve... received much condemnation as pseudoscience." Strikingly absent from all these well annotated books are footnotes in support of these claims. Who are these "reputable scholars" who have "discredited" these books? Peter Irons offers one name, that of Richard Nisbett, who has authored no books on the subject but does post a 16-page (triple-spaced) bit on his web site. Price and Wicker offer none. The most prominent debunker, Stephen Jay Gould in "The Mismeasure of Man," rather than offering a statistical rebuttal, attacks the premise that statistical analysis is meaningful. He does, of course, cite a few studies that support his case.
The policy implications are vast. If all peoples are equally capable we must find and do away with whatever prejudices are holding some back. If all peoples are not equal we have to fall back a century or so and reconsider the white man's burden. What is the obligation of more richly endowed individuals and nations to the less richly endowed? If society is a Darwinist struggle between equally capable combatants, some simply more industrious than others, one would not have too much sympathy for the losers. If the struggle is truly unequal the humanitarian thing to do is to redistribute wealth. It is probably also the smart thing to do -- buy peace. Give Marx partial credit, though redistributing all of it as under Communism proved to be a disaster. Amy Chua's recommends in "World on Fire" that "market dominant minorities" like Jews and Chinese curry favor by giving back to their adoptive countries.
Whatever the story, policy should be based on knowledge. Would some "reputable scholar" please step forward to poke holes in Messrs. Lynn and VanHansen's argument? If that proves impossible the U.N. might have to take their arguments into consideration. Imagine what it would do to that body's self esteem.
Our society forms social policy, most recently the Supreme Court's decision on affirmative action in Michigan, on the premise that all racial groups are equal. Not Lincoln's "all men are equal under the law" but "all men are equal".
We observe inequality in every aspect of life, most notably educational achievement and financial status. If, as society assumes, all people are equally capable of achievement, there has to be a conspiracy holding some peoples down. And what is it? White racism, they say, as if it could not be more obvious. Well hidden, but still manifest in "low expectations" and "subtle disparagement" etc. We white guys have broad shoulders, but jeez, it gets old after a while. Blacks and liberals have such low opinions of our fundamental morality, we descendants of the abolitionists who freed the slaves and were active partners of the NAACP over the years. It could start to affect our self esteem.
A similar conspiracy theory appears at the international level. African countries supposedly remain poor because they have been exploited by more advanced nations. Their attempts at industrialization supposedly fall victim to greedy foreign companies through a scheme of "globalization" that values them only for their raw materials and cheap labor. Just as the racism theory holds that we white guys are in cahoots to hold minorities down, this one assumes an evil alliance among large companies and advanced countries to depress the market value of the labor and raw materials produced by developing countries. Oppression is a rhetorical staple at the U.N.
It has been almost 10 years since "The Bell Curve" appeared. Since that time many other books have appeared that appear to support its arguments that peoples are different in statistically significant ways, among them "IQ and the Wealth of Nations", "The g factor," "Race, Evolution and Behavior," "Genes, Peoples and Languages," and Steven Pinker's "The Blank Slate."
As Pinker so eloquently reports, these books have been vilified by academics. Typical is Peter Irons writing in "Jim Crow's Children" that "virtually all reputable scholars reject claims, most recently leveled by Richard Herrenstein and Charles Murray.." or Hugh Price disparaging "scientifically discredited" theories of intelligence in "Achievement Matters" or Tom Wicker writing in "Tragic Failure" that "...the Bell Curve... received much condemnation as pseudoscience." Strikingly absent from all these well annotated books are footnotes in support of these claims. Who are these "reputable scholars" who have "discredited" these books? Peter Irons offers one name, that of Richard Nisbett, who has authored no books on the subject but does post a 16-page (triple-spaced) bit on his web site. Price and Wicker offer none. The most prominent debunker, Stephen Jay Gould in "The Mismeasure of Man," rather than offering a statistical rebuttal, attacks the premise that statistical analysis is meaningful. He does, of course, cite a few studies that support his case.
The policy implications are vast. If all peoples are equally capable we must find and do away with whatever prejudices are holding some back. If all peoples are not equal we have to fall back a century or so and reconsider the white man's burden. What is the obligation of more richly endowed individuals and nations to the less richly endowed? If society is a Darwinist struggle between equally capable combatants, some simply more industrious than others, one would not have too much sympathy for the losers. If the struggle is truly unequal the humanitarian thing to do is to redistribute wealth. It is probably also the smart thing to do -- buy peace. Give Marx partial credit, though redistributing all of it as under Communism proved to be a disaster. Amy Chua's recommends in "World on Fire" that "market dominant minorities" like Jews and Chinese curry favor by giving back to their adoptive countries.
Whatever the story, policy should be based on knowledge. Would some "reputable scholar" please step forward to poke holes in Messrs. Lynn and VanHansen's argument? If that proves impossible the U.N. might have to take their arguments into consideration. Imagine what it would do to that body's self esteem.
January 22, 2025
Sadly, the authors don't have real data to support their central claims about the effect of national IQ on national wealth. The authors did a fair job trying to produce educated guesses for the average IQ of each nation, but the margin of error is too great to render any analysis meaningful.
It's a fascinating topic to think about. The problem of causation is not adequately discussed here. Economic status impacts the IQ of a population, and while I don't doubt that IQ impacts economic status, that isn't proven in this book. I would expect that the cognitive ability of a population would impact entrepreneurship behaviors and productivity of workers. A less brash researchers might have chosen to examine this on a smaller scale.
It seems strange to me that an author who has taken such care in adjusting his estimates for the Flynn effect simultaneously assumes that IQ is static and genetic, ignoring the likely causes of the Flynn effect, including parasites, nutrition, levels of inbreeding, education, literacy, cognitive demand of activities of daily living. All of these have significant relevance to between-country differences in IQ scores, and all of these are impacted by a country's economic circumstances.
It's a fascinating topic to think about. The problem of causation is not adequately discussed here. Economic status impacts the IQ of a population, and while I don't doubt that IQ impacts economic status, that isn't proven in this book. I would expect that the cognitive ability of a population would impact entrepreneurship behaviors and productivity of workers. A less brash researchers might have chosen to examine this on a smaller scale.
It seems strange to me that an author who has taken such care in adjusting his estimates for the Flynn effect simultaneously assumes that IQ is static and genetic, ignoring the likely causes of the Flynn effect, including parasites, nutrition, levels of inbreeding, education, literacy, cognitive demand of activities of daily living. All of these have significant relevance to between-country differences in IQ scores, and all of these are impacted by a country's economic circumstances.
February 10, 2025
⭐⭐⭐⭐Really Good.
July 28, 2020
Lots of good data but nothing ground breaking.
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews