The chart above shows just how much national wealth depends on the national IQ. A huge 54 percent of the GDP (income per person) difference among nations can be explained by the average IQ in those countries. Reading the 2002 list of personal incomes and IQ's in 127countries shows clearly that the more developed nations have higher average IQ's.

The authors who developed this nations' IQ list are well respected. One of them, Lynn, first documented the "Flynn-Lynn effect" - that raw IQ scores have been increasing 2-3 points per decade. Thus he certainly was able to relate and compare the many national IQ studies to each other. The reasons for the national IQ differences, as well as for the Lynn effect, are not well understood. But their impact on a nation's wealth are not much in doubt. One starting point for understanding are the current theories on causes of racial IQ differences.

- whether the countries have market or communist economies

Perhaps the best overall measure determining a nation's income is economic competitiveness (which includes some IQ and corruption measures),

For individuals, research shows that social skills (SQ) and ambition play major roles in economic success. But what is true for an individual is obviously not the case for nations, or large groups of individuals. For example, average SQ scores show almost no differences among racial groups. But average IQ scores among racial groups vary considerably, as documented in The Bell Curve. The result is that social skills, which are so important in individual success, have no net impact at the national level. Of course, individual scores for both SQ and IQ vary widely.

Ambition, on the other hand, may play a role in national success. In his Jobs/ Ambition survey, SQ author Sloan did not notice any differences attributable to ethnicity. But cultural differences and lack of exposure to opportunities in the Third World might make Ambition a measurable difference among nations. It is unlikely that the Ambition/ self-skills portion of Goleman's EI is as important at a national level as it is on an individual level. But it could be a factor, like a market economy or lack of corruption in a society.

The above list was developed by Van Sloan in consultation with James Sheehan, chairman of Stanford's history department.

China appears twice in the above list of leading nations. And at the time of the Roman Empire, its civilization was close to the top. But after 1400 China stagnated. It was almost carved up by smaller but more powerful countries from 1850 - 1950. What changed? The IQ in China of 100 is close to the 102 in modern Italy and Europe (like ancient Rome?) and perhaps above that in the Greece of Byzantine times. Up to 1400AD, there are striking parallels between the Mediterranean and Chinese civilizations. That webpage also presents a theory many have offered that Chinese writing characters prevented it from keeping up with the West. On the other hand, those Chinese characters are credited as a major reason why East Asian IQ's are the highest in the world.

Comments to: VanSloan@yahoo.com 

	Web SQ.4mg.com (this website, 170+ pages on IQ and Success skills)

The ads below are placed by Google.com - they are not necessarily endorsed by this site