Seasonal affective disorder (SAD), also known as winter depression, winter blues, summer depression, summer blues, or seasonal depression, was considered a mood disorder in which people who have normal mental health throughout most of the year experience depressive symptoms in the winter or summer.[1]
In the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders DSM-IV and DSM-5, its status was changed. It is no longer classified as a unique mood disorder but is now a specifier called With seasonal pattern for recurrent major depressive disorder that occurs at a specific time of the year and fully remits otherwise.[2]
Although experts were initially skeptical, this condition is now
recognized as a common disorder, with its prevalence in the U.S. ranging
from 1.4% in Florida to 9.7% in New Hampshire.[3]
The U.S. National Library of Medicine
notes that "some people experience a serious mood change when the
seasons change. They may sleep too much, have little energy, and may
also feel depressed. Though symptoms can be severe, they usually clear
up."[4] The condition in the summer can include heightened anxiety.[5]
There are many different treatments for classic (winter-based) seasonal affective disorder, including light therapy with sunlight or bright lights, antidepressant medication, cognitive-behavioral therapy, ionized-air administration,[8] and carefully timed supplementation of the hormone melatonin.[9]
"I wonder if this explains the religious. They think they’re (literally)
God’s image made manifest, and clearly swallow totalitarian doctrine
based on emotional need, rather than sound reasoning and hard evidence
(most often).
The orbitofrontal cortex is also where sexual pleasure is generated.
Sexual pleasure and high level brain functions appear to be closely
related. That’s something to think about. It also makes me wonder about the sex life of these “rose colored” people. It might be worth a study."
U. TEXAS-AUSTIN—The less you use your brain’s frontal lobes, the more you see yourself through rose-colored glasses, new research shows.
“In healthy people, the more you activate a portion of your frontal
lobes, the more accurate your view of yourself is,” says Jennifer Beer,
an assistant professor of psychology at the University of Texas at Austin. “And the more you view yourself as desirable or better than your peers, the less you use those lobes.”
Findings are scheduled for publication in the February edition of the journal NeuroImage.
The natural human tendency to see oneself in a positive light can be
helpful and motivating in some situations but detrimental in others,
Beer says.
Her research, conducted at the university’s Imaging Research Center,
gives new insight into the relationship among brain functions and human
emotion and perceptions.
It may help scientists better understand brain functions in seniors
or people who suffer from depression or other mental illnesses. It could
also have implications for recovering methamphetamine addicts whose
frontal lobes are often damaged by drug use and who can overestimate
their ability to stay clean.
As part of the study, 20 subjects answered questions about how they
compared to their peers on such positive traits as tact, modesty,
likability, and maturity and such negative traits as materialism,
messiness, unreliability, and narrow-mindedness. As the subjects
answered those questions, a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) machine
scanned their brains.
The subjects who viewed themselves in a very positive light across
those disparate areas used their orbitofrontal cortex less than the
other subjects. This region of the frontal lobe is generally associated
with reasoning, planning, decision-making, and problem-solving.
Some subjects who had accurate views of themselves showed four times
more frontal lobe activation than the most extreme “rose-colored
glasses” wearer in the study.
Among a separate set of subjects who were asked the same questions,
those who were required to answer quickly saw themselves in a far more
positive light than those who had unlimited time to answer. Those
findings suggest that processing information in a more deliberate manner
may be the way in which frontal lobe activation permits people to come
to more realistic conclusions.
“Subjects made unrealistically positive judgments about themselves
more quickly, suggesting these judgments require fewer mental
resources,” Beer says. “Perhaps, like the visual system, the social
judgment system is designed to give us a quick ‘good enough’ perception
for the sake of efficiency.”
New research
has many (on the Internet) talking about the evolutionary causes of our
“addiction” to the Internet, but it’s not an addiction, at least not in
the way we’re used to applying the label.
•
Having trouble shutting down your
computer? Can’t stop refreshing your Facebook and Twitter streams? Did
you close Reddit in your browser window … only to open Reddit right back
up again? If you’re concerned that your Internet use is becoming a
compulsion, you’re probably right: New research suggests that our
uncontrollable desire to click may be deeply rooted in human evolution.
“The Internet is not addictive
in the same way as pharmacological substances are,” cognitive scientist
Tom Stafford at the University of Sheffield in the U.K. told Tia Ghose
at LiveScience “But it’s compulsive; it’s compelling; it’s distracting.”
As Stafford explains, our love for the Internet is rooted in the fact that human beings, in Ghose’s words, “compulsively seek unpredictable payoffs.”
The cognitive-reward structure offered by services like email and
social media are similar to those of a casino slot machine: “Most of it
is junk, but every so often, you hit the jackpot.” This is a symptom of
low-risk/high-reward activities like lotteries in general. As
researchers found in a 2001 article in International Gambling Studies,
systems that offer a low-cost chance of winning a very large prize are
more likely to attract repetitive participation and, in turn, stimulate
excessive (and potentially problematic) play. Although the stimuli are
different (the payoff on the Internet being juicy morsels of information
and entertainment rather than money), Stafford says that the immediacy
and ubiquity of Internet “play”—i.e. being able to check your tweets or
emails on your phone with no major transaction cost—only increases the
likelihood that someone will get sucked into a continuous cycle.
Using the DSM as a guide, Dr. Kimberly
Young defines “Internet addiction” as an impulsive-control problem with
four distinct subtypes: cybersexual addiction, cyber-affair/relational
addiction, net compulsions, and information overload.
“The Web’s unpredictable payoffs train people much in the same way
Ivan Pavlov trained dogs,” Ghose writes. “Over time, people link a cue
(e.g., an instant-message ping or the Facebook homepage) with a
pleasurable rush of feel-good brain chemicals. People become habituated
to seek that social rush over and over again.”
The message of Stafford’s research is clear: Your brain really wants
you to click on all of those cat photos. “The next time you wonder
whether you’re spending too much time on Facebook or BuzzFeed or whatever, just remind yourself: You’re wasting time because your brain wants you to,” writes my former colleague Megan Garber at The Atlantic.
“The Internet’s charisma is a function not just of all the great stuff
that lives on it, but also of humans’ carefully honed survival
mechanisms—mechanisms evolved long ago, in response to vicious enemies.
We can’t quit our cat videos, it turns out, because of … lions.”
Anyone who spends a significant amount of time on the Internet,
whether for work or pleasure, can see the tendrils of Stafford’s
research in their day-to-day behavior. I often find myself cycling
between my Gmail inbox, Facebook, Twitter, and other services,
especially social media services which are designed to constantly
refresh automatically or allow users to “infinitely scroll” through the
contents of their feeds. And as Internet access and usage increases,
this trend is likely to grow. According to the Pew Internet and American Life Project,
81 percent of American adults use the Internet as of survey, with 74
percent of users going online “just for fun or to pass the time.” A 2011 Ipsos Media
poll found that the amount of time “affluent” Americans in general
spend online rose about 20 percent from 2010 to more than 30 hours
weekly; affluent Millennials spend more than 40 hours a week online,
“essentially a full-time job.”
Does this mean we’re all Internet addicts now? Yes and no. Using the DSM
as a guide, Dr. Kimberly Young at the Internet Addiction Center defines
“Internet addiction” as an impulsive-control problem with four distinct
subtypes: cybersexual addiction (Internet pornography), cyber-affair/relational addiction (an addiction to chat rooms and other online social forums), net compulsions (addictions to online gaming, online gambling, and eBay), and information overload (an addiction to database searches). The tipping point for Internet “addiction” is its impact on your day-to-day activities.
01. Do you feel preoccupied with the Internet (think about previous online activity or anticipate next online session)?
02. Do you feel the need to use the Internet with increasing amounts of time in order to achieve satisfaction?
03. Have you repeatedly made unsuccessful efforts to control, cut back, or stop Internet use?
04. Do you feel restless, moody, depressed, or irritable when attempting to cut down or stop Internet use?
05. Do you stay online longer than originally intended?
06. Have you jeopardized or risked the loss of significant
relationship, job, educational, or career opportunity because of the
Internet?
07. Have you lied to family members, therapists, or others to conceal the extent of involvement with the Internet?
08. Do you use the Internet as a way of escaping from problems or of
relieving a dysphoric mood (e.g., feelings of helplessness, guilt,
anxiety, depression)?
According to Young, answering “yes” to five or more questions may mean you suffer from Internet addiction.
However, “addiction” in the descriptive sense does not mean
“addiction” in the clinical sense. Whether “Internet addiction” should
be regarded as a serious psychological illness has been a matter of
debate for years; the creators of the DSM-5 considered relegating
Internet addiction to a section on behavioral disorders along with sex
and gambling addictions, but opted to list it as a “condition for
further study” instead of recognizing it as an official disorder. That
Stafford places compulsive Internet surfing in the same cognitive
category as gambling and other low-risk/high-reward activities defined
as behavioral rather than purely psychological problems by the DSM
suggests that your Internet fixation, however severe or uncontrollable
it may seem, likely doesn’t reach the level of other compulsions. (It’s
worth noting here that “Internet addiction disorder” was originally proposed as a satirical hoax by Dr. Ivan Goldberg in 1995, based on the DSM’s description of pathological gambling, in an effort to parody how psychiatry’s bible categorizes excessive behavior.)
“Lots of us are furtively checking emails in movie theaters and in
the middle of the night, feel lost when temporarily separated from our
electronic friends, and spend every spare minute surfing, texting, or
playing games. But does this really qualify us as addicts?” asked Dr.
Allen Francis, former chair of the DSM-IV Task Force, in Psychology Today.
“No, not usually. Not unless our attachment is compulsive and without
reward or utility; interferes with participation and success in real
life; and causes significant distress or impairment. For most people,
the tie to the Internet, however powerful and consuming, brings much
more pleasure or productivity than pain and impairment.”
More plainly put: Your Internet addiction isn’t an addiction but the
logical extension of existing biological functions, not necessarily a
sign of dysfunction. So when does your Twitter fixation move from simply
being a symptom of how humans cognitively interface with the Internet
(and an annoyance to your friends and family) to something more? If you
find yourself totally incapable of leaving the house to go to work, or
to do anything but move between infinite browser windows, don’t tweet
about it; instead, consider calling a doctor.
Jared Keller is a journalist and
social media specialist living in New York. His writing has appeared in The Atlantic, Bloomberg Businessweek, National Journal, Outside, Al Jazeera America, and The Verge.
Singapore: Psychiatrists in Singapore are pushing for
medical authorities to formally recognise addiction to the internet and
digital devices as a disorder, joining other countries around the world
in addressing a growing problem.
About 87 per cent of Singapore's 5.4 million population own
smartphones. Singaporeans also spend on average 38 minutes per session
on Facebook, almost twice as long as Americans, according to a study by
Experian, a global information services company.
Adrian Wang, a psychiatrist at the upmarket Gleneagles
Medical Centre, said digital addiction should be classified as a
psychiatric disorder.
"Patients come for stress anxiety-related problems, but their
coping mechanism is to go online, go on to social media," Dr Wang said.
He recalled having treated an 18-year-old male student with extreme symptoms.
"When I saw him, he was unshaven, he had long hair, he was
skinny, he hadn't showered for days, he looked like a homeless man," Dr
Wang said.
The boy came to blows with his father after he tried to take
away the young man's laptop computer. After the father cut off internet
access in the house, desperation drove the boy to hang around
neighbours' homes trying to get a wireless connection.
He was eventually hospitalised, put on anti-depressants and received "a lot" of counselling, Dr Wang said.
"We just needed to break the cycle. He got better, he was
discharged from the hospital and I saw him a few more times and he was
OK."
Tan Hwee Sim, a consultant psychiatrist at The Resilienz Mind
clinic in Singapore, said that the symptoms exhibited by her young
adult patients had changed over the years.
Obsession with online gaming was the main manifestation in
the past, but addiction to social media and video downloading are now on
the rise.
Singapore's problem is not unique, with a number of countries
setting up treatment centres for young internet addicts, particularly
in Asia where South Korea, China and Taiwan have moved to tackle the
issue.
In Singapore, there are two counselling centres – Addictions
Management Services and Touch Community Services – with programs for
digital addiction.
Trisha Lin, an assistant professor in communications at the
Nanyang Technological University, said younger people faced a higher
risk because they adopted new technology earlier – but could not set
limits.
Ms Lin defined digital addiction by a number of symptoms: the
inability to control craving, anxiety when separated from a smartphone,
loss in productivity in studies or at work, and the need to constantly
check one's phone.
Ashkenazi Jews are smart. Shockingly brilliant, in general. Impressive in brain power. How did they get that way?
Ashkenazi Jews, aka Ashkenazim, are the descendants of Jews from
medieval Alsace and the Rhine Valley, and later, from throughout Eastern
Europe. Originally, of course, they were from Israel. Genetic research
from the Albert Einstein College of Medicine suggests that the
Ashkenazi bloodline branched away from other Jewish groups there 2,500
years ago, and that 40% of them are descended from only four Jewish
mothers. Approximately 80% of the Jews in the world today are
Ashkenazim, with the remainder primarily Sephardic.
Researchers who study the Ashkenazim agree that the children of
Abraham are on top of the IQ chart. Steven Pinker – who lectured on
“Jews, Genes, and Intelligence” in 2007 - says “their average IQ has
been measured at 108-115.” Richard Lynn, author of “The Intelligence of
American Jews” in 2004, says it is “only” a half-standard higher:
107.5. Henry Harpending, Jason Hardy, and Gregory Cochran, University
of Utah authors of the 2005 research report, “Natural History of
Ashkenazi Intelligence,” state that their subjects, “score .75 to 1.0
standard deviations above the general European average, corresponding to
an IQ of 112-115.” Charles Murray, in his 2007 essay “Jewish Genius,”
says “their mean is somewhere in the range of 107-115, with 110 being a
plausible compromise.”
A Jewish average IQ of 115 is 8 points higher than the generally
accepted IQ of their closest rivals—Northeast Asians—and approximately
40% higher than the global average IQ of 79.1 calculated by Richard Lynn
and Tatu Vanhanen in IQ and Global Inequity.
Plus, contemplate this astounding tidbit: Ashkenazi “visual-spatial”
IQ scores are only mediocre; in one study their median in this category
was a below-average 98. They surmount this liability by logging
astronomic figures in “verbal IQ”, which includes verbal reasoning,
comprehension, working memory and mathematical skill; a 1958 survey of
yeshiva students discovered a median verbal IQ of 125.6.
What does it mean that Ashkenazim have a high IQ, in terms of
producing “geniuses”? With their population so small - a mere 0.25 of
the world total - does it make any serious difference? The answer is
YES. A “bell curve” is used to illustrate IQ percentile in a specific
group – in a “general population” where IQ average is 100 the curve
assumes these proportions:
less than 70 IQ - 2.5%
70-85 IQ - 12.5%
86-100 IQ - 35%
101-115 IQ – 35%
116-130 IQ – 12.5%
greater than 130 IQ – 2.5%
Applying the same bell curve for Ashkenazim, but with a 17-point upward lift in median IQ (using the From Chance To Choice digit) produces the IQ upgrade below:
less than 87 IQ – 2.5%
88-102 IQ – 12.5%
103-117 IQ – 35%
118-132 IQ – 35%
133-148 IQ – 12.5%
greater than 148 IQ – 2.5%
This shifting upward of the bell curve by more than a standard
deviation (15 points) means that more than five times as many Ashkenazim
are eligible for Mensa (minimum 130 IQ) and more than five times as
many have the average IQ of an Ivy League graduate.
In reality, Ashkenazim are enrolled in the Ivies by a proportion ten times greater than their numbers; for example they represent 30% of Yale students, 27% of Harvard, 23% of Brown, 32% of Columbia, and 31% of Pennsylvania.
This suggests that either the “bell’s curve” is lifted for the
Ashkenazi a bit longer at the high end or there are additional factors
that enhance their ability to succeed. Regarding the first possibility,
Charles Murray notes that “the proportion of Jews with IQs of 140 or
higher is somewhere around six times the proportion of everyone
else.” Harpending, Hardy and Cochran sport roughly the same equation; “4
out of every 1,000 Northern European is 140+ IQ, but 23 out of every
1,000 Jew is 140+.” Murray also relays a report from sky-high up in the
genius range, when he notes that a 1954 survey of New York public school
children with 170+ IQs revealed that 24 of the 28 were… Jewish.
Now that I’ve established that Ashkenazi have superlative IQ scores,
let’s observe what they’ve accomplished with their highly functional
brains.
In the 19th century, Mark Twain noted that:
[The Jews] are peculiarly and conspicuously the
world’s intellectual aristocracy… [Jewish] contributions to the world’s
list of great names in literature, science, art, music, finance,
medicine, and abstruse learning are way out of proportion to the
weakness of his numbers. He has made a marvelous fight in this world…
and has done it with his hands tied behind him.
Twain’s observation is not dated. Ashkenazi Jews have continued to
mentally out-compete other demographics since his statement, often
suffering horrendous consequences for their toil. Here is a brief list
of Ashkenazi accomplishments in the last 90 years.
Nobel Prizes: Since 1950, 29% of the awards have gone to Ashkenazim, even though they represent only a small fraction of humanity.Ashkenazi
achievement in this arena is 117 times greater than their population.
This pace isn’t slowing down; it is accelerating. In the 21st century, they’ve received 32% of the total, and in 2011, five of the thirteen Nobel Prize winners were Jewish – 38.5%.
Hungary in the 1930s: Ashkenazim were 6% of the population,
but they comprised 55.7% of physicians, 49.2% of attorneys, 30.4% of
engineers, and 59.4% of bank officers; plus, they owned 49.4% of the
metallurgy industry, 41.6% of machine manufacturing, 72.8% of clothing
manufacturing, and, as housing owners, they received 45.1% of Budapest
rental income. Jews were similarly successful in nearby nations, like
Poland and Germany.
“Significant Figures”: In “Jewish Genius” by Charles Murray,
the author tallies up important contributing individuals in a variety of
vocations, noting how immensely over-represented Jews are compared to
what could be expected due to their small population. His conclusion in
various categories is: Biology – “significant” Jews appear 5 times
greater their population, Chemistry 6X, Physics 9X, Literature 4X, Music
5X, Visual Arts 5X, Math 12X, Philosophy 14X.2
USA (today): Ashkenazi Jews comprise 2.2% of the USA
population, but they represent 30% of faculty at elite colleges, 21% of
Ivy League students, and 25% of the Turing Award winners. Plus, “Jews
have made up 50% of the top two hundred intellectuals… 40% of partners
in the leading law firms in New York and Washington… 59% of the
directors, writers, and producers of the fifty top-grossing motion
pictures…”
Israel: In 1922 this swamp-and-desert land had an impoverished
population of 752,000 inhabitants. Today there are 7,746,000 residents,
with a large Ashkenazi population (3 million, and 60% of the workforce)
that has elevated it into a high-tech entrepreneurial nation with the
highest per capita income in the region. Israel rates 1stin the world in graduate degrees, 1st in museums, 1st in home computers, and 1st in publishing scientific papers.
Personally, I find the Nobel Prize statistic the most amazing.
Consider this: if everybody on the planet was an Ashkenazi Jew, would
the result be 117 times more Nobel Prize-winning caliber individuals,
with 117 times as many spectacular achievements, per annum? INSTANT
SINGULARITY! Without any help from AI…
(Sephardic Jewish achievement is represented in many of the
categories above, especially in Nobel Prize statistics. When this
article was originally published - in a shorter version, on August 7,
2011 by the Institute for Ethics in Emerging Technology (ieet.org) –
Sephardic Jews expressed some perturbation that they were omitted from
the essay. I’d like to acknowledge the immense contribution of
Sephardic Jews with this all-too-brief list of notables from their
lineage:
Elias Canetti (Nobel Prize in Literature, 1981), Tobias Michael Carel
Asser (Nobel Peace Prize, 1911), Rene Cassin (Nobel Peace Prize, 1968),
Franco Modigliani (Nobel Prize in Economics, 1985), Francois Jacob
(Nobel Prize in Medicine/Physiology, 1965), Salvador Luria (Nobel Prize
in Medicine/Physiology, 1969), Baruj Benacerraf (Nobel Prize in
Medicine/Physiology, 1980), Rita Levi-Montalcini (Nobel Prize in
Medicine/Physiology, 1986), Emilio Segre (Nobel Prize in Physics, 1959),
Claude Cohen-Tannoudj (Nobel Prize in Physics, 1997), plus philosopher
Jacques Derrida, economist/philanthropist Bernard Baruch, painter Amedeo
Modigliani, and Benjamin Disraeli, the British Prime Minister.
In the medieval era, Sephardic achievements were also quite significant. In George Sarton’s Introduction to the History of Science,
the author notes that 95 out of 626 scientists in the world from
1150-1300 were Sephardic Jews -15% - far exceeding their population
proportion.
However, when Sephardic IQ is presently recorded, the sums are no
higher than the northern European average, and definitively not as
elevated as Ashkenazi.)
Let’s proceed. With the facts I’ve laid out, only the most obtuse
reader can resist my pronouncement that Ashkenazi Jews are, on average, extraordinarily intelligent.
I’m not asserting Ashkenazi cognitive specialness because I’m
Philo-Semitic, or Zionist, or pro-Israeli. I’m pointing it out because
it is irrefutably true.
That said, the question that my essay seeks to unravel is… Why? Why
is the IQ of Ashkenazi Jews so high? Is the reason due to their
genetics, environment, culture, education, or a unique combination of
multiple factors?
In my initial publication of this essay, I provided eight reasons for
high Ashkenazi IQ. But then, I received a flurry of email suggestions
(many from professors) providing me with additional information. Twenty
theories are now listed in this expanded essay, and I’ve attempted to
give my sources the credit they deserve, even though – in several
instances - I don’t have their actual names, just their Internet
chat-monikers. Here’s my new list – many related to each other -
presented in roughly chronological order:
Babylonian Eugenics – In 586 B.C.E., Jerusalem was totally
destroyed by the Babylonians, led by their monarch Nebuchadnezzar, who
“carried into exile… all the [Jewish] officers and fighting men, and all
the craftsmen and artisans… only the poorest people of the land were
left.” (2Kings 24:10-14) The Indestructible Jews, by Max Dimont, defines the deported people as “the flower of Judah’s aristocracy and intellectuals.”
The exiled Jews of this first Diaspora became highly successful in
Babylon. Dimont claims, “In the libraries of Babylon, intellectual Jews
found a new world of new ideas. Within five decades, exiled Jews bobbed
to the surface of the top echelons on Babylonian society, in business
enterprises, in the scholastic world, in court circles. They became
leaders in commerce, men of learning, advisors to kings.”
In 538 B.C.E., the Persian king Cyrus the Great granted Jews
permission to return to their homeland. Wealthy Jews - who had
established successful trade routes and businesses in Babylon - financed
zealous returnees who wanted to re-settle Judah. Initial attempts
failed, but eventually, 1,760 settlers led by the prophet Ezra and the
governor Nehemiah rebuilt the wall of Jerusalem and resurrected the
nation. These “Babylonian” Jews returning to Israel discovered that
their poorer brethren that were left behind a half-century earlier had
slipped away via assimilation, vanishing into neighboring pagan creeds.
Cyril Darlington, in his The Evolution of Man and Society,
suggests that the temporary separation of the Jewish elite, and
permanent removal of the uneducated and unskilled, provided a genetic
intellectual boost to the creed.
The returning Jews also instituted two customs that enhanced the
mental solidity of their culture’s future. A ban on intermarriage with
Gentiles was enforced, and the first five books of Moses were canonized,
as the Torah.
People of the Difficult Book: The Torah (the first five books
of the Jewish Bible) and the Talmud (recordings of rabbinic discussions)
are intellectually complex and sophisticated. Practitioners of Judaism
are required to learn and study the extensive, mentally rigorous laws.
Thematic content of the scriptural passages is not simplistic or
literal, it is, conversely, designed for comprehension on multiple,
abstract, metaphorical levels. Blind faith and slavish devotion,
encouraged by other faiths, is not conducive to Judaism. Instead,
worship in the ancient monotheism demands significant literacy skills
due to the cognitive demands of the texts, with tradition maintaining
that understanding the Talmud requires “study of seven hours a day for
seven years.”Charles Murray notes that, “no other religion
made so many demands upon the whole body of its believers,” with the
subsequent analysis that, “Judaism evolved in such a way that to be a
good Jew meant that a man had to be smart.”
Healthy Hygiene & Diet: Professor Sam Lehman-Wilzig of
Bar-Ilan University in Israel provided me with this theory. His
suggestion is based on the fact that - due to their customary practices -
the Jews probably enjoyed better hygiene than Gentiles. He points to
the Jewish washing of hands before every meal, the men bathing at least
once a week in the “mikveh” (a purification bathhouse) and the women
bathing at least once a month, after their menstruation was over. He
also notes the restriction on pork prevented Jews from contracting
trichinosis. (Famous casualties of this parasitic disease include
Gautama Buddha and Wolfgang Mozart). With lower disease rates, Jewish
bodies would not have suffered as much as Gentiles and this would have
improved their mental capacities.
This notion has been repeated elsewhere. In 1953, research by Johns
Hopkins University pharmacologist David I. Macht surmised that all the
dozens of meat items banned by Jewish dietary laws in Deuteronomy and Leviticus were, in fact, more toxic than the kosher flesh that was permitted. Additionally, in the recent book Survival of the Sickest,
author Sharon Moalem suggests that Jews removing leaven from their
homes during Passover helped keep out the rats that spread bubonic
plague in the 13th century. Last but not least, wealthy
Ashkenazi Jews dwelling in larger houses in eastern Europe would have
survived epidemics easier because they didn’t suffer the same high
multiple infection rate that occurred in smaller homes with greater
crowding.
Extensive correlation between high IQ, healthy diet, infectious
diseases, sanitation, and home crowding, is examined via research
studies in later chapters of this book, particularly in “Early Years.”
Education Emphasized, Way Back in B.C. – Jeremiah Unterman of
Jerusalem informed me that the Torah instructs every Jewish father to
teach the Torah to his children, and Marisa Landau notes on a futurepundit.com
6/4/05 discussion that it’s forbidden by the Jewish religion to keep
child illiterate. Additionally, Landau reports that Jewish women
learned to read and write, a phenomenon that was unique in the ancient
world. Landau also mentions that it has long been a custom among Jews to
provide a full pension - for up to 10 years – to an intelligent
son-in-law who wishes to entirely devote himself to study. The Jews, it
seems, invented the notion of “scholarships.”
In the medieval era, the French monk, Peter Abelard (1079-1142)
penned this about Jewish education: “A Jew, however poor, even if he had
ten sons, would get them all to letters, not for gain as the Christians
do, but for understanding of God’s law. And not only for his sons, but
his daughters.”
Mandatory Schools For Males - In 64 A.D., the high priest
Joshua ben Gamla issued and implemented an ordinance mandating schools
for all boys, beginning at age 6. Within 100 years, Jews had established
universal male literacy and numeracy, the first ethnicity in history to
achieve this.
The progressive, demanding edict created a huge demographic shift.
The high, oft-times prohibitive cost of educating children in the
subsistence farming economy of the 2nd to 6th
centuries prompted numerous Jews to voluntarily convert to Christianity,
leading to a decline in Jewish population from 4.5 million to 1.2
million.
Natural “eugenics” favored two groups in this situation: 1) the sons
of wealthier, ostensibly more intelligent Jews, who could provide
greater funding for the schools that maintained their offspring’s
membership as Jews, and, 2) the smartest boys who could quickly learn
reading, writing and arithmetic at a pace at which they could afford to
“stay Jewish.”
Who was left out? Removed from the gene pool? Answer: the poorer, uneducated Jews, and/or those with the lowest IQ.
Urban Upgrade – 80-90% of Jews were farmers in 1 AD. But only
10-20% remained in agriculture by 1000 A.D. The education required by
Joshua ben Gamla’s edict delivered verbal and math skills to Jewish
boys, enabling them to move out of subsistence rural life into
highly-skilled urban professions, involving sales, trade, and financial
transactions.
Moving from a pastoral environment into cities implements an IQ
boost, due to urbanism’s increased complexity, literacy, and technology.
A Hanoi National University study in 2006 showed a whopping 19.4 IQ
difference between city and country students. A 1970 survey in Greece
recorded a difference of 10-13 points. Other studies note smaller
discrepancies of only 2-6 points, but unanimously, urban residents
always score higher, and Jews are one of the world’s longest-urbanized
ethnicities.
Dialectic and Rational Thought – Dr. Sam Lehman-Wilzig
informed me that one of the noteworthy approaches to Jewish learning is
“dialectic.” The Talmud itself is not a “law code” but instead, a huge
compendium of ARGUMENTS. Jews are encouraged to see different
perspectives of an issue, and they’re taught to question everything,
including the Law, the Rabbi’s logic, and one’s own belief system.
Rabbis developed argumentative principles, an entire system of
questioning that the Jews have utilized for 2,000 years in both
religious and secular debates.
Dialectic was not a ‘Jewish’ invention: it was a learning technique
that Jews borrowed and adapted from Greek philosophy; the synthesis is a
‘Socratic-Jewish methodology.’ Traces of the Greek influence are
evident in the Passover Seder where the Jewish father reclines on a
pillow (similar to the Greeks) while the youngest Jewish child asks Four
Questions. This method of learning was unique during the Middle Ages,
compared to Catholic Europe’s ‘authoritative’ traditions.
Dr. Sanford Aranoff, Professor of Science and Mathematics at Rider
University, conveyed to me a similar message. In his opinion, Judaism is
based on principles of rational thought. (Rational thinking begins with
clearly stated principles, continues with logical deductions, and then
examines empirical evidence to possibly modify the principles.)
The analytic, strategic skills developed in both Jewish dialectic and
critical thinking are an important component of IQ tests, and they’re
essential in legal, academic, science, and engineering careers.
Clever Clerics Propagate: A major difference between Catholicism and Judaism is that priests have been celibate since the 4th
century Council of Carthage decreed that they abstain from conjugal
relations, whereas Jewish rabbis have always been encouraged to marry
and multiply. In the Middle Age this resulted in massive IQ depression
for Catholics, because their brightest, academically gifted boys were
usually locked up in seminaries that wasted their gene pool. Meanwhile…
sage, scholastic Jewish rabbis were marrying smart women and creating
large, clever families. Three tomes that examine this phenomenon are
Robert Novick’s Anarchy, State and Utopia, Ernst Vandenberg’s The Jewish Mystique, and Paul Johnson’s A History of the Jews.
Breeding for Brains:
“Our Rabbis teach, Let a man sell all that he has and
marry the daughter of a learned man. If he cannot find the daughter of a
learned man, let him marry the daughter of one of the great men of his
day. If he does not find such a one, let him marry the daughter of one
of the heads of the congregation, or, failing this, the daughter of a
charity collector, or even the daughter of a schoolmaster; but let him
not marry the daughter of an illiterate man, for the unlearned are an
abomination, as also their wives and their daughters.” P’sachim, fol.
49, col. 2.
Judaic texts like the one above emphasize repeatedly that knowledge
and intelligence are supreme virtues, with ignorance the grossest
liability. Following this dictum, the Jews enhanced their gene pool for
smartnesss. In A History of the Jews, author Paul Johnson notes
that, “among the Jews the most intelligent people have always been very
valued and sought after as husbands, so they procreate and spread their
good genes.”Charles Murray observed another matchmaking
tendency, when he notes that “by marrying the children of scholars to
the children of successful merchants, Jews were in effect joining those
selected for abstract reasoning ability with those selected for
practical intelligence.”
Meanwhile,
Catholics were marrying for “class” reasons, angling for blue-blood
aristocrat gains that had no link to intelligence. Physical strength
and valor was also desired, via brave knights on the battlefield - this
exaltation of brawn over brains likewise did nothing to advance that
religion’s collective IQ.
Trading Tongues: Ashkenazi merchants plied their wares over a
vast area, originally to Islamic regions, but later internationally -
from rubber in Brazil to silk in China.To prosper in the
exchange, they memorized multiple languages. The stateless tribe needed
diverse fluency anyway, to communicate in adopted lands with their
neighbors that spoke German, Polish, Latvian, Lithuanian, Hungarian,
Russian, Ukrainian, French, Dutch, etc.
The Ashkenazi developed a “fusion” tongue: Yiddish (German, Hebrew,
Aramaic, plus other Slavic languages and a touch of Romance). At its
height - before World War II - Yiddish was spoken by 13 million. The
polyglot language produced exemplary culture in literature, theater, and
film.
Neurologists today recognize that multiple language learning enhances
memory, mental flexibility, problem solving, abstract thinking, and
creative hypothesis formulation. Explanations of the benefits abound; I
recommend listening to the video, “Bilingualism Will Supercharge Your
Baby’s Brain.”
Squeezed Into Brilliance: Jews in Europe were officially
excluded from “common” occupations such as agriculture from 800-1700
A.D. Indeed, they were usually not allowed to own land. The restrictions
forced Ashkenazim for 900 years into urban vocations that were
cognitively more demanding, such as trade, bookkeeping, commerce, sales,
and investment. The frequent Christian prohibition against charging of
interest in money lending - prohibited as “usury” – assisted in opening
up financial banking occupations for Jews. Historical records reveal
that 80% of the Jews in Roussilon, southern France, in 1270 were
money-lenders.
Later, after they were evicted from Western Europe, Ashkenazim were
welcomed in Poland as urban investors and initiators of trade who could
help modernize the nation. They were also in great demand in middle
management positions because they had mathematic and business
administration skills.
Ashkenazim who weren’t mathematically and verbally adept enough to
succeed in these “white collar” jobs drifted away from Judaism—low IQs
were pushed out. Conversely, the most successful merchants and number
crunchers raised larger families, passing on an increasing percentage of
algebraic brains.
Winnowed By Persecution: The most intelligent and/or wealthy
Ashkenazim were better equipped to escape Inquisitions, pogroms,
persecutions, holocausts, and other genocidal threats because they: 1)
could afford to emigrate; 2) could predict the need to do so; and 3) had
social and economic opportunities in the nations they fled to. Poorer,
less connected, and less astute Ashkenazi ranks thus were inexorably
depleted.
The repeated annihilation, expulsion, and flight of the Jewish people
is universally known. The first Diaspora to Babylonia has already been
mentioned. A second Diaspora is popularly regarded as a series of
dispersals from Israel after the failure of Jewish revolts against the
Roman Empire from 70 C.E. – 135 C.E. In 629 C.E., King Dagobert of the
Franks ordered the Jews to convert, leave his land, or face
execution. The First Crusade, 1096-1099 C.E., cruelly
slaughtered thousands of Ashkenazi, an estimated 25%. Jews were expelled
from England in 1290, France in 1394 and parts of Germany in the 15th century. Pogroms in the Russian Empire in the 19th and early 20th
century murdered substantial numbers of Jews, and the Holocaust,
instigated by Adolf Hitler, led to the genocide of approximately six
million, primarily Ashkenazi.
Whenever and wherever persecution began, Jews were more likely to
escape if they could pay their way out, or were wealthy enough to have
horses, carriages, employees as guards, rich relatives to flee to, and
friends in “high places.” High IQ has frequently been correlated with
economic success.
Sick Genius: Ashkenazim are prey to about nineteen
debilitating genetic diseases, and it’s been surmised that several of
them might have cognitive “side effects” that can enhance intelligence.
Many of the disorders can kill or severely weaken those who have two
copies of the gene, but if you inherit just one, you get a “heterozygote
advantage” that can include neuron growth promotion and accelerated
interconnection of brain cells. For example, having just one of the
allele in Tay-Sachs and Niemann-Pick – GM2ganglioside - could moderately
increase dentrite growth.
Another Ashkenazi ailment is Gaucher’s disease, which seems to
promote axonal growth and branching. A survey discovered that out of
255 employed patients of Gaucher’s disease at Shaare Zedek Medical
Centre in Jerusalem, were in occupations that require IQs over 120, and
15% were scientists. Another survey of Ashkenazim with Torsion Dystomia
revealed an average IQ of 121.
I interviewed Gregory Cochran via email; he’s the University of Utah co-author of the 2005 research report, “Natural History of Ashkenazi Intelligence.” In
his words, “any IQ boost due to Gaucher’s [would be] a good deal less
than 10-15 points [but] It may be that big for Torsion Dystonia:
everyone who has treated them marvels at how sharp they are… [However]
only a fraction [of Ashkenazi IQ elevation] is due to particular
mutations like Gaucher, in our opinion.” In another interview, Cochran
pinpointed the fractions as, “One in two thousand Askenazi, at most,
carry a Tay-Sachs mutation and a Gaucher mutation, the two most common.”
Ashkenazim are not an isolated ethnicity, after residing with Eastern
European neighbors for over a millennium. While many observers suggest
that they’re 30% European, an Emory University study concluded that
researchers “were able to estimate that between 35 and 55 percent of the
modern Ashkenazi genome comes from European descent.”
Positive Thinking – Aubrey Max Sandman, PhD, an electrical
engineer in London, sent me an email asserting that positive attitude is
what counts, not genetics. His opinion is that non-Jews do not work as
hard as Jews, to attain their full potential.
In actuality, “positive thinking” actually does elevate IQ.
2011 research at Michigan State University revealed that a subject’s
“mind set” makes a difference in intelligence because their attitude
determines if they react productively, or self-destructively, to their
mistakes. The report will soon be published, hopefully with specific
data charting IQ gains, in an upcoming issue of Psychological Science.
Check Mate: Chess historically has been a highly favored
activity among Ashkenazim; a 1905 magazine described it as the “Jewish
National Game.” Almost 50% of Grandmasters are Ashkenazi. The visual,
organizational, and strategic skills required for chess build up the precuneus in the superior parietal lobe, and the caudate nucleus, a part of the basal ganglia in the subcortical region.
Admittedly, these benefits are not hereditary, but youngsters who
practice the game can elevate their memory storage, strategic planning,
and IQ.
Additional information about the benefits of chess can be found in my later chapter, “School Years.”
Melodic Minds: Music has been revered in Jewish religious
traditions for 3,000 years. Klezmer “reached a very high level of
sophistication and ornamentation,” according to the Jewish Music
Institute, and Ashkenazi composers and instrumentalists contribute
hugely to Western classical music (one history site declares, “The Jews
‘Own’ the Violin”). Have centuries of practice paid off? Researchers
today believe music training optimizes neuron development and improves
brain function in math, analysis, memory, creativity, stress management,
concentration, motivation, and science.
Additional information about the benefits of musical training can be
found in the following chapters: “Early Years” and “School Years.”
Comfortable Supportive Families, With High Expectations: Success promotes success, on the neurological level. Victory provides a rush of dopamine,
a neurotransmitter that activates motivation for further
accomplishments. Ashkenazi children generally understand they are
capable of high achievement, and they’re urged to develop their skills
for contribution to humanity.
Is stern discipline necessary to produce these results? Ashkenazim
have long discouraged spanking of their children; strong familial ties,
incessant encouragement, and hard focused work at excellent
institutions, seems to be sufficient.
Available income that allows offspring to study and develop
intellectually is also important; wealth also permits access to elite
schools. Surveys indicate that American Jews earn about twice the income
of non-Jews, plus they have 2.5 times more capital assets. The result?
The average American Jew receives 2.5 more years of education. Even
during the Middle Age many Jews were upper and middle class in economic
status, a condition that secured good education for their children.
Untermensch Go Elsewhere?A 40+-year old Jewish
commenter from New York City with the nomenclature “ASAMATTEROFFACT”
informed me that - in his opinion - Ashkenazi who lack high intelligence
and creativity end up feeling inferior. He believes this eventually
leads to the “untermensch” marrying outside of the tribe. Only the ubermensch
remain to reproduce. His point of view was echoed by another poster -
Efox” - who stated that less intelligent Jews incapable of being their
own “Priest” inevitably left Judaism to join another religion.
Empathetic Rabbis – A commenter who identified himself as
“zeev from jew york city” informed me that many rabbis were “Einsteins
of Empathy” – amazingly kind, patient, loving and understanding of other
humans. The high-level “empaths” impacted their congregations, making
their lives better and promoting their ambitions and enterprizes.
In later chapters (“Early Years” and “School Years”) I discuss the
IQ-boosting benefits of “Emotional Support” and “Teacher Effectiveness” –
two gifts that were undoubtedly provided by compassionate rabbis.
Fear of Anti-Semitism? – Commenter “Morris Wise” stated a paranoiac position after reading my original article on the instapundit.com
website. In his opinion, Jews are driven to attain high academic
success, career achievement, and wealth, because they want to feel safe,
protected and insulated from anti-Jewish feelings in the outside
community. This point-of-view can, of course, be justified by the long
history of resentment and persecution that Jews have experienced.
———————————————————————————————————————————
Twenty explanations for high Ashkenazi IQ! My opinion? Regarding the
fourscore? They’re possibly all correct, and valuable to contemplate.
However, what I find most intriguing are the “environmental” factors that are accessible to all humanity.
I wonder: if the people of the world really want high-level
intellectual achievement, why don’t we play chess with our children at
night, instead of tossing them a violent video game? Why can’t we listen
to their classical compositions on the weekend, instead of urging them
to get concussions on the football field? Isn’t a “dietary code”
actually an excellent idea, in American culture with its 33.5% adult
obesity? Why can’t we provide them with excellent schools, entice them
to learn foreign grammar, and convince them to believe in and expand
their abilities, instead of forcing them to endure years of educational
mediocrity and expecting nothing back but the same?
If all humanity adopted the best available characteristics of
successful cultures like the Ashkenazi, would we, as a whole, immensely
benefit? Would we learn more quickly, more deeply, and produce greater
wonders? Would we become over- instead of under-achievers?
If we promoted high IQ behavior to humans everywhere, globally, would we all become… enhanced? Better humans?
