A fish our of water would seem stupid.

I agree that if a proper pyramid/hierarchy of intelligence could be created ranking by race would not be proper.

Some people say that race is a fabricated differentiation and to a degree I agree but if instead of race we called it (no matter how repulsive) breed, like breeds of dogs and if it was based on genetics and not skin color I think you could isolate at least half of the causal factors associated with intelligence. That nature half but that would still leave out the nurture half. I think you can teach for intelligence. Like a computer, its intelligence has two sources, one is its processing power and the other is its software.

White male dominance and superiority is almost totally nurture, privilege. The dominant culture nurtured white male privilege that endowed them with superiority. Not because it was natural or earned but because the dominant culture perpetuated it. If white males are superior it is because they oppressed women and people of color.

I believe that culture is at least as big an influence on intelligence as genetics.

I would not completely rule out genetics as a contributor to intelligence. Clearly some breeds of dogs are more trainable more empathetic more intelligent than others. I don't believe that the same genes that determine intelligence determine skin color.

Imagine if an unbiased, independent study of genetic contributions to intelligence reveal that the presence of Neanderthal or Denisovan genes contributed to intelligence. We could see a resurgence of eugenics.

TEK