THESE ANSWERS ARE NOT QUITE RIGHT. LET’S SEE IF WE CAN IMPROVE THEM:
We use IQ for two different measures, WITHIN a population, and ACROSS populations.
The best measure that I know of is to use what we today call 105, which represents approximately the IQ where an individual can repair a machine, or learn by reading instructions, rather than instruction and repetition. (IQ roughly measures the rate of learning, or rather the information requires in order for one to identify constant relations (patterns) of increasing numbers(density) of constant relations(causes)).
General knowledge will allow you to make more use of your IQ, but it will not improve your neural ability to identify existing and potential constant relations (patterns), with ever decreasing quantity and quality of information.
If we took the east asian population that is the worlds most homogenous ethnic group that is the world’s most pedomorphically advanced genetic group, that has done the most to kill off its underclasses, (Han/Korean/Japanese) then they would have a distribution of 100.
If we take any other group we would have a distribution of 100. But when we compare groups to one another some groups decline and others rise. Right? So relative to the UK, Hong Kong has approximately half a standard deviation in IQ (106–108) advantage (at least in non-verbal) IQ. From conversations I’ve had with Lynn, it certainly appears that in anglodom we have lost at least that many IQ points in the past 150 years through asymmetric reproduction in anglo civilization, and as much as 12 points.
Now, we can then recalculate 100 by the median of the new larger group, OR, we can recalculate each group to a prior demonstrated performance of a 100 individual.
So we can describe a rolling distribution or we can describe distributions in relation to a fixed capacity.
So it’s not really true that the world IQ average is 100. As far as I know, the world average IQ relative to the anchor of 100(UK/ENG), is in the 90’s and is getting lower every day due to asymmetric reproduction (dysgenia).
Sorry but this subject is abused for the purposes of propaganda all the time. IQ matters. Eery point of median IQ lost in population has a tremendous cost, because langauge, norms, and institutions must exist for the median.
As a rule of thumb. Every person under 95 is six times as costly as the productivity of every person over 105. Ergo the most benefit that any people can provide is actually not education or employment but reduction of the reproduction of the underclasses. And by underclasses the hard number is under 105.
Uncomfortable truths are uncomfortable for a reason. They deprive us of presumed discounts.