Damnit, the Japanese and SouthKoreans beat the Germans to the IQ-score.
Personally, I can see how this study certainly reflects the reality.
But then again the whole idea of an IQ is invented and defined by the (mostly unreligious) scientists of modern, secular societies so it does seem kind of tautological. As if they were saying: "Look, the followers of our scientific worldview correspond most with the criteria of measurement which our science has developed."
This may go as far as making certain skills and qualities a part of the test while others remain totally untouched. Why, for example, is someone who can count a number of geometrical shapes on a piece of paper considered "smart" and someone who can actually make practical use of geometry while building a square house for himself or shaping a perfectly round clay-pot is not?
From what I understand, IQ measures almost only "explicit" forms of knowledge: All that knowledge which can be verbally expressed and put down on paper, which goes perfectly with a paper-, data- and quantification-obsessed society.
Actually knowing core-concepts without being able to explain them, knowing how to DO things is the vast (and largely unexplored) domain of "implicit" or "tacit" knowledge, which is hardly measured in an IQ test.
So what it boils down to for me are the questions:
What exactly is the IQ-score actually expressing? What doesn't it express?
