One interesting part of the explanation for this is that Jews stepped up to fill a niche that others wouldn't because it was deemed as unethical
Seems like a rationalization, to be honest. I can guarantee you that 'ethics' never play a role when it comes to earning money.
They took jobs others wouldn't, and created an empire out of it. Similar to the 'Jewish banker' idea, actually.
The problem was not that it was considered 'unethical' (not directly anyway), but because it was forbidden for Christians, at least during most of the Middle Ages. Basically, only Jews and Lombards were lending people money... which caused them no end of grief.
I'm not here to argue one side or the other in the IQ debate - I simply don't know - but I will say Jewish lawyers/bankers isn't necessarily inherently linked to their average IQ...
Seems like a rationalization, to be honest. I can guarantee you that 'ethics' never play a role when it comes to earning money.
I said deemed unethical, I'm not even saying it was.
Point is, there was a time where certain branches of legal practice were taboo, just like how, as you say, Jews were some of the only people lending money for a time. Jewish lawyers stepped in to fill this under-practiced law, congregated around each other, and then you had Jewish law schools and associations. That's all I'm saying; Jews took jobs others didn't want.
The reason I'm skeptical is this: some of the very same people who like to cite black IQ scores as proof that they're less than white people, sometimes dismiss IQ scores when they do not favor white people.
For example, on the subreddit, someone argued that higher Asian IQ scores say nothing, because Asians are supposedly not creative. Or whatever. Some sort of self-justification.
Seems like a rationalization, to be honest. I can guarantee you that 'ethics' never play a role when it comes to earning money.
The problem was not that it was considered 'unethical' (not directly anyway), but because it was forbidden for Christians, at least during most of the Middle Ages. Basically, only Jews and Lombards were lending people money... which caused them no end of grief.
Yes, I do agree, not necessarily inherently.
I said deemed unethical, I'm not even saying it was.
Point is, there was a time where certain branches of legal practice were taboo, just like how, as you say, Jews were some of the only people lending money for a time. Jewish lawyers stepped in to fill this under-practiced law, congregated around each other, and then you had Jewish law schools and associations. That's all I'm saying; Jews took jobs others didn't want.
I got that. Was just saying that people wouldn't care. Ethics don't get in the way of making money.
I wonder, is that actually the case? I've never heard of any such thing, which is not to say that it's not true.
Ah, gotcha. And I guess 'taboo' would be better phrasing than 'unethical.'
I heard someone say it once, so it's absolutely true. ;)
The reason I'm skeptical is this: some of the very same people who like to cite black IQ scores as proof that they're less than white people, sometimes dismiss IQ scores when they do not favor white people.
For example, on the subreddit, someone argued that higher Asian IQ scores say nothing, because Asians are supposedly not creative. Or whatever. Some sort of self-justification.