Jews have a significant percentage of Nobel Prizes in the hundred and ten years in which the prize is awarded, why was Israel dragged to the bottom of the list until the beginning of the first decade of the 21st century, and what does the future hold for us?
Dr. Adam Reuter - Chairman of Reuter Midan Investment House and CEO of the Consulting Co., Ltd.
The first hundred years - the Jews put everything in their pockets
The Nobel Prize, the most famous of all prizes, has been distributed since 1901 following the will of Alfred Nobel, a Swedish industrialist and inventor of dynamite. The prizes are distributed in Sweden around the date of December 10, the day of Nobel's death. According to the award committee's policy, only a living person can win it. Each Nobel laureate is selected by a committee in his field, and in some cases there are several laureates. As is known, Nobel's developments were directly related to the development and production of explosives and he felt growing discomfort in the face of the military use of his inventions. It is said that one of the reasons for his last will was news published about his death in a French newspaper, prematurely and by mistake, when his brother Ludwig passed away. This false news about his death appeared under the headline "Dealer of Death Dead". Following this, it seems that Noble made a decision to help the human race in some way as compensation for his murderous invention, from which he became a multi-millionaire.
The analysis of the first 100 years of awarding shows that the weight of the Jewish Nobel Prize winners is completely disproportionate to the weight of the Jews in the world population, and not even proportional to their weight in the population of the Western world. This amazing statistic shows us that 21% of the Nobel Prize winners for their generations are Jews and half-Jews (the source for this statistic: 2001 Encyclopedia of Philatelic Judaica, by my father, the late Dr. Benjamin Reuter). While on a multi-year average, the number of Jews in the world, during these 100 years, in relation to the total average of the world population in those years, was lower than 0.3% (until the Holocaust event, the Jews constituted on a multi-year average close to 0.4% of the world's population). Meaning, Jews received Nobel Prizes in a volume that is 70 times more than their weight in the population!
(26%). in economics 20 out of 51 (39%, it should be noted that the Nobel Prize for economics has only been awarded since 1969). In literature 11 out of 99 (11%) and in the Nobel Peace Prize 11 out of 95 (12%). A total of 155 Jews (and half-Jews) out of 731 winners within 100 years. In these numbers there is proof of the Jewish genius, no less. No matter how you look at the numbers, they are amazing. 39% of Nobel Prize winners in economics are Jews! The gentiles always claimed that the Jews excelled in commerce and economics. Anti-Semitic teachings were built on this. The Nobel Prize apparently proves that there is some truth in this...
Sorting by country, of course, the USA collected the most awards (232 Nobel Prizes in the 20th century), followed by Germany (83) and Great Britain (80). Later it already drops strongly with 49 prizes for France and 31 prizes for Sweden. After that, Russia (20), Switzerland (20), Italy (18), the Netherlands (16) and Denmark (13), thus ending the top ten of the Nobel Prize winning countries in the 100 years of the 20th century.
Why didn't Israelis win the Nobel Prize in Science during the first century?
Until Israelis won Nobel Prizes from the beginning of the 21st century, a big question was asked. Why have so few Israelis won (Begin Peres and Rabin won the Nobel Peace Prize, Agnon the Nobel Prize for Literature) and why have Israelis never won the Nobel Scientific Prizes? They asked if the scientific community in Israel is lagging behind what is happening in the world? Are her achievements relatively low? Have we been so preoccupied with security that we have not turned to the sciences? And perhaps, mercifully, the Jews will have their minds erased as soon as they live in the land of their ancestors... There were even claims of anti-Israeli committees, conspiracies and what not.
The answer to this excellent question deserves to be explored, but all of that changed when Kahneman won the Nobel Prize for Economics in 2002. The sequel was even better: from the beginning of the 21st century, Israel rose to first place in wins per capita, no less.
Since the beginning of the 21st century, Israel has been in first place in the world in Nobel Prizes per person
The winning of Prof. Ada Yonat from the Weizmann Institute for the Nobel Prize in Chemistry for 2009 brought to five the number of Nobel Prizes won by Israelis since the beginning of the 21st century. 2002 and Israel Oman won the Nobel Prize for Economics in 2004. It is important to note that in the 2005st century all Israeli winners are from the fields of science.
Since the beginning of the 21st century, a total of 119 Nobel Prizes have been awarded (on average there are two prize winners). Israel, with a population that is about 0.1% of the world's population, has received over 4% of the prizes since the beginning of the century as a country, more than 40 times the weight of Israelis in the world's population. Definitely a disproportionate weight which is a very significant achievement. But the truly amazing achievement is that at the beginning of the 21st century, Israel is in first place in the world in Nobel Prizes per soul. Israelis receive a Nobel Prize at a rate of one prize for every 1.5 million inhabitants. Austria, which is in second place, receives one award for every 2.8 million inhabitants. Britain awards one for every 5.5 million inhabitants. The USA receives one prize for every 6 million inhabitants, Australia one prize for every 6.5 million inhabitants, France and Germany in a ratio of one to ten, Japan one prize for every 15.5 million inhabitants. Since the beginning of the 21st century, Israel is in sixth place in the world in receiving Nobel prizes in general (including peace and literature)!
It should be noted that the sorting is done according to the countries of origin of the winners, therefore the USA receives 50 winners, when in fact 65 prize winners actually live there today (among them the Israeli Kahaneman).
It is also interesting to note that Sweden, which was the world champion in receiving Nobel Prizes per capita in the first century of the prize distribution, with an average of slightly more than 3 prize recipients in each decade of the twentieth century, has deteriorated greatly and received a single Nobel Prize since the beginning of the 21st century. It is hard to ignore From the fact that the Swedes themselves are the awardees and therefore there is probably something to explain their strong bias towards Swedish candidates... Switzerland and Denmark were in second and third place in Nobel Prizes per capita in the 20th century. In the 21st century, Switzerland with a single Nobel Prize and Denmark is not on the map at all. Of course, it is too early to predict and the statistics of the 20th century can actually suggest that Swedes, Swiss and Danes are certain candidates for receiving Nobel prizes in the coming decade of the 21st century.
What does the future hold? The indications raised by the Wolf Prize
The Wolf Prize is an award given in Israel, since 1978, to renowned scientists and artists from all over the world, "for their achievements for humanity and for friendly relations between peoples, without distinction of citizenship, race, color, religion, gender or political view". Every year five or six prizes are awarded, while in science the prize is given in the fields of: agriculture, chemistry, mathematics, medicine and physics. In art, the award is given in the following fields: architecture, music, painting and sculpture. The prize in each field is one hundred thousand dollars, and the winners are chosen by an international committee of experts appointed every year.
The award is given by the "Wolf Foundation", founded in 1976 by Dr. Ricardo Wolf, inventor, diplomat and philanthropist, and his wife, Franziska Sobirna-Wolf. The rules for awarding the award are fixed in the Wolf Fund Law, which was approved by the Knesset in 1975. According to the law, the Minister of Education and Culture will serve as chairman of the foundation's board, and the foundation will be subject to audit by the State Comptroller.
The Wolf Prize in chemistry and physics is considered by many to be the second most prestigious prize after the Nobel Prize, and in medicine, the third most important after the Nobel Prize and the Lasker Prize. Until the foundation of the Abel Prize in mathematics, the Wolff Prize was the closest equivalent to the Nobel Prize in Mathematics. The Wolf Prize for Agriculture is considered to be equivalent in importance to the Nobel Prize in this field.
But the Wolf Prize symbolizes something more in the eyes of some. It probably serves as the best predictor of the probability that a scientist will receive the Nobel Prize in the fields of chemistry, medicine and physics. In fact, the Wolf Prize does have an amazing predictive ability with a probability of 27.8%. It turns out that out of the 43 winners of the Wolf Prize for Physics since the awarding began, 13 of them subsequently won the Nobel Prize, a prediction rate of 30.2%. Of the 39 winners of the Wolf Prize in Chemistry since the prize was awarded, 8 have subsequently won the Nobel Prize, a prediction rate of 20.5%. Of the 44 winners of the Wolf Prize in Medicine, 14 subsequently won the Nobel Prize, a prediction rate of 31.8%. This means that out of 126 winners of the Wolf Prize for Science in their respective generations, 35 later won the Nobel Prize, as mentioned, an amazing prediction rate of 27.8%.
Among the winners, there are also 13 Israeli scientists who make up 10.3% of the winners of the Wolf Prize for Science for generations. The numbers in the field of medicine are the most dramatic: Israelis make up 18.2% of the winners of the Wolf Prize for Medicine. Since the prediction rate of the Wolf Prize for winning the Nobel Prize in the fields of science is, as mentioned, 28%, the number of Israelis who should, according to this probability, win the Nobel Prize in the fields of science should be close to four. Since two of the Israeli Wolf laureates have already also won the Nobel (Abraham Hershko and Ada Yonet), two more should win, according to the statistics of the Wolf Prize. The highest probability is the Nobel Prize for Medicine, because eight Israelis have won the Wolf Prize for Medicine out of 13 in total, and only one of these winners has won the Nobel so far (Hershko, but rather the Nobel in Chemistry). It should be noted that Yakir Aharonov, winner of the Wolf Prize in Physics for 1998, was very close to winning this year.
Unfortunately, we do not have similar statistics for the purpose of calculating probabilities for a Nobel in economics or literature. At least in economics, the first decade of the current century brought Israel two winners (out of five Israeli Nobel winners). Also in literature Amos Oz is very close every year. Therefore we can (seemingly of course) expect a similar number of Israeli Nobel laureates in all categories, even in the second decade of the century, when the safest bet is the Nobel Prize in Medicine.
40 תגובות
the central point. That the Jewish garden leads the world in relation to the world's population, seven and a half billion and the number of Jews in the world is 15 million and it doesn't matter where and when they lived, it is a fact.
One and a half billion Chinese and only one received the Nobel Peace Prize and sat all his life in prison and now he is not alive either.
Two billion Muslims and only eight received a Nobel Prize.
Hello Dr. Adam Reuter and thank you for your fascinating article. How can I reach Jewish Nobel Prize winners who are currently living in the world? Do you have the possibility to send me their emails and contact details. Thanks in advance. Malka Sheham Doraon malkasd@hotmail.com
Ram, I have a feeling you're a little racist?
Those who check will find that most of the Jewish intelligentsia did not immigrate to Israel, neither before the Holocaust nor from those who remained after it. Therefore, the percentage of Israelis who receive the Nobel Prize is low compared to the percentage of Jews. Many Jews immigrated to the United States or integrated into Soviet Russia.
Ram:
Not true.
The topic of the article here is also not politically correct.
In any case you have to decide if it is easy or impossible and in both cases there is no reason to demand that others do it for you.
It is easy to test in terms of the testing technique, but impossible because of the religion of political correctness.
Ram:
If it's relatively easy and if it interests you - check it out!
Why do you demand it from others?
It is relatively easy to check. Don't let anyone get permission to investigate, because we live in a world of factually correct.
By the way, I will never judge a specific person according to his origin, people should be taught to treat everyone else as equal as long as it is not proven otherwise, so I see no problem in checking groups. In any case, each person is a person in his own right. Let's say for example that Moroccans have a low IQ on average, this does not mean that if I meet a Moroccan I will think he is stupid.
Ram:
It is very convenient - to throw out a statement and demand that others prove the opposite (with accepted scientific tools, of course).
Why are there no Nobel Prize winners who are not of non-Ashkenazi origin?
I think I once read that the number of people with an IQ of over 130 is very low among Mizrahim compared to Ashkenazim, even though the average IQ is not very different.
I'm not a racist, prove the opposite, using accepted scientific tools.
Year:
Probably in your eyes - intelligence is something different from the accepted meaning of the word. This article talks about spatial perception which is part of intelligence and other articles talk, in addition to spatial perception, also about mathematical ability, verbal ability and more.
In all these areas there are differences and they are all part of the definition of intelligence.
I have already told you about studies examining differences between siblings versus differences between identical twins.
In short - there are so many proofs that if you are still waiting - you will probably wait forever because you simply refuse to accept them.
Michael
The article you sent me shows, like many others, differences in what they call cognitive style between males and females, and cognition obviously plays an important part in intelligence, but it is an unsuccessful choice regarding intelligence, which is not even mentioned in the summary I read.
In the past women had no part in literature and all the arts, and today they penetrate all branches and with distinction. Today almost half of the doctoral students in science are women.
In sports it is worth noting that almost all the outstanding athletes use an external Joachim incentive, many have already been caught, and it is doubtful that their results can be used to establish any general claim. In my opinion, there are indeed genetic differences that confer sporting advantages, but they are personal and not collective. It should also be remembered that the population known as African American or black, in America including the Caribbean, just like Obama, is not a typical African but carries at least half of a genome of European origin.
In any case, I am still waiting for good confirmation of the dominant claim that the quality of intelligence is determined by genetics. I have almost no doubt that the achievements of Jews in the sciences are the result of sociological systems, what's more, there is actually no biological characterization for Jews at all.
Year:
Just to give you an idea - here is one study out of hundreds:
http://www.springerlink.com/content/v5j2rg1qk0786036/
Oh Yair Yair:
I hope they find the genes to read things correctly.
I did not say that no genetic differences were found between humans and chimpanzees.
Read again.
You know of no evidence that intelligence depends on genetics because you choose to ignore the evidence.
After all, even what is said in this article is a confirmation!
Besides - a greater correlation was found between the IQ scores of identical twins than between the IQ scores of non-identical twins.
Besides, differences were found between the cognitive abilities of women and men and it was proven that these differences are innate and not the result of culture. Yes! I saw that at the end you also expressed your disbelief in this fact, but this is also the result of controlled and very serious studies that were also done on toddlers who had not yet absorbed anything from their environment and also demonstrated the similarity between the cognitive abilities of women who developed as women in terms of external characteristics even though they were genetic males and the abilities of ordinary women And it was found that the women who are women only externally - are more similar to men than women in their cognitive abilities.
You say that my claim that the Jews excel in science is not true and bring as proof your words... what? What you see as reasons for this excellence! In other words - you accept the claim that you said you reject!
I guess you wanted to say something else but that's what you said.
You probably wanted to say that "it's true - the Jews are more outstanding - but there are reasons for this that are not genetic" but your desire to claim that I'm wrong overcame your ability to think logically.
If what I described above is what you wanted to claim - you should know that all the "helping reasons" you gave - are also evidence of intelligence and in general - you have not shown that they exist - you just want us to accept this possibility just like that and your whole motivation is "political correctness".
The Jewish winners of the Nobel Prizes in Science mostly came from families that were completely shaved in their environment.
There are genetic differences that cause excellence in different types of sports. I don't know if swimming is the clear example, but it is clear that the achievements of Bolt and his fellow countrymen in running are a clear example of this.
It may be that swimming is also an example, but none of this is important because there is a huge difference between the religion of the blacks in society and the religion of the Jews.
In short - there is no inaccuracy in my words.
Michael
Some erroneous claims in your words:
Several parallel but different genes have already been found in humans and chimpanzees, such as FOXp2.
I do not argue with the claim that the quality of intelligence is conditioned by genetics, but I know of no confirmation of this. That is, I know of no confirmation that if a person excels in a certain ability it is due to a genetic system that is fundamentally different from other people who lack excellence in the same ability. I know countless claims about it, and not even one actual confirmation. If you or another supporter of this opinion know, tell me about it or direct me to the source. All the claims I have heard so far are both inductions and deductions based in both methods on the main assumption that genetics necessarily determines the majority of traits.
The main claim in your words that the Jews excel in science in all cultures more than others, clearly and this neutralizes the influence of culture, is far from the truth and verification. The number of factors necessary to verify their influence is large and complex, for example a tendency among Jews to direct efforts to theoretical work, a relatively high economic situation of Jews (?), and much more.
It should be compared to the inferiority of women in scientific achievements, which may be due to genetic inferiority?? Or from assigning a social place to women that distances and makes participation in science difficult?
Another comparison is found in the achievements of athletes: no African has ever excelled in swimming competitions. Attributing this finding to inferior swimming genetics?
I think it has an evolutionary and genetic connection is that Judaism is one of the oldest religions and they always had something to read and learn and that is something special, and also the economic ability they had always contributed to the children and all kinds of characteristics they only have.
Ohad:
You saw my responses and therefore it should have been clear to you that I do not think that the fact that entire populations do not participate in the "game" is due to genetic inferiority of those populations.
Therefore the "hope" you expressed in the matter is irrelevant.
By the way - the article also does not mention genetics anywhere.
I don't know what statistics on studies you did but in any case, to me, the important number is the number of award recipients per capita and other numbers are not important.
In this number, the Jews are leading so that there is no possible statistic that would put them in a less good place.
This number (of the number of wins per person in a given population) actually expresses the probability that you will receive a prize if you belong to that population.
If you do some math, you'll see that the number you talked about (the percentage of prize winners divided by the percentage in the entire population) is obtained as this probability times a size that is constant for all populations!
In other words - the ratio between the score of the Jews in the first index and the score in this index of another population is the same as the ratio between their scores in the second index.
Of course, none of the two indicators say anything about the populations that do not participate in the "game" but both indicators say exactly the same thing about populations that do participate in it.
The word processor here does not support formulas so I hope that being Jewish you can develop them yourself.
If you don't succeed, tell me and I'll find a way to show them to you here.
Michael,
We are talking about two different things. Certainly the number of winners per capita among the Jews will remain the same regardless of the question of which populations we add or subtract. But the comparison in the article (as well as most other publications refer to the Jewish genius in the Nobel context) deals with the percentage of Jews among the recipients of the prize, compared to their representation in the general world population. This comparison is misleading simply because populations of billions of people do not win Nobel Prizes at all (and I hope we will agree that the reason for this is not genetic inferiority) and therefore do not affect at all one part of the equation - the number of winners, but greatly reduce the "percentage of Jews in the global population" ( After all, Jews hardly live in all those places).
If we were to consider only the population of the West (the population relevant to Nobel Prizes in the 20th century) - the percentage of Jews among the prize recipients would of course remain the same, but the "percentage of Jews in the population" would suddenly jump dramatically, since we removed billions of people from the equation.
For example, when referring to the years before the Holocaust, the "percentage of Jews in the population" would suddenly rise from 0.4 to 2-3%. As mentioned, the figures are still flattering, but this way you get a slightly more logical proportion.
Year:
I think you're wrong.
I don't know what the situation is today in the field of music (that is, talented musicians). Do you have any statistics on this or are you just talking?
Be that as it may, playing music depends on the culture and if the Koreans didn't do it in the past, it could also be that they were always more talented but it wasn't expressed in the past because the culture didn't encourage the expression of talent.
If you tell me that it is possible that some tribe in Papua is more talented in science than the Jews, I will not disagree with you, but there is no trace of dealing with the real findings in your words, which are that the Jews stand out favorably (in science) in all cultures - something that clearly neutralizes the influence of culture.
There is a difference between finding the relevant genes and proving that a trait is genetic.
For your information - the unique genes that make us human compared to our ape brothers have not yet been located and despite this there is no doubt in the claim that the difference between us and apes stems from the genes.
There is in the interpretation many confirmations for the claim that intelligence depends to a large extent on genetics and also the finding of the superiority of the Jews in winning Nobel prizes is a confirmation for this claim.
The further you go back in time, the more the influence of the specific culture outweighs the influence of the genes. This is an obvious phenomenon in light of the fact that today's media is not the media of the night and then no one thought about globalization and even if they did - it didn't help them.
Michael is Eddie
that any prize including Nobel and Wolff are conditional on proven education - education is part of culture, while cultures, i.e. nations, countries, that do not involve the subjects of the aforementioned prizes do not participate in the deployment.
On the other hand, the claim about Parisian genes that are unique to Jews is nothing more than an induction without any real evidence, it also applied in the past to Jewish musicians who once excelled in particular and now have passed the baton to the Koreans.
To this day, as far as I know, no genes have been proven that indicate hyperintelligence in any way and in the context of Jews. As far as I know so far, different genes than the norm have been shown to be associated with retardation, such as FOXp2. Even the claim that intelligence in general is conditioned by genes is inductive without direct vision, if easier to digest.
In the third millennium BC, there was elite intellectual expression in Egypt and Sumer-Iraq, and during the first millennium BC, the foundations of controlled rational thought were established by elite intellectual expression in Greece, and from there it migrated to Italy and Western Europe. It had nothing to do with the Jews.
And above all, for some reason the statisticians on our site forget that the sample they use is really tiny.
It may not be politically correct - but I am convinced that Michael Rothschild's words in post 18 are absolutely right. There is a genetic and cultural basis for Jewish relative superiority, and one can even talk about superiority.
It is possible to understand the genetic basis in light of the indisputable historical phenomenon of ethnic openness - that is, the absorption of foreign genes through conversion (which was also a mass phenomenon in certain periods), the freeing of slaves and their automatic absorption into the original Jewish audience (until a few hundred years ago was a significant phenomenon), and the constant movement of Jewish population groups (even on the scale of entire communities) from place to place and mixing them locally.
The 'hybrid' effect, which means genetic enrichment and improvement - is necessary under such conditions and circumstances.
Only the Jewish communities (for the most part, not all though) went through all these processes on the scale of many generations.
It seems that the processes of cultural enrichment of the Jews - there is no need to go into detail.
Two more notes:
The superiority of Jews is proven not only in the context of the Nobel Prizes. It has been proven in any given historical segment and in diverse cultural and environmental contexts. To a large extent, the supremacy on the historical scale also belonged to the Jews as a culture and as a society.
It seems that if education is also the creator of culture, then to a large extent culture is the frame of reference and the main content of education, and it is an agent. The relationship is two-way.
Drugs, alcohol, criminality and prostitution, this is the majority of the Israeli youth, addicted to Big Brother and Zemer Nold and other oily programs, so how will the Nobel Prizes come to Israel
Year:
And yet - the percentage of Jews among American Nobel Prize recipients is greater than their percentage in the American population.
Receiving the award is apparently conditional on two things (surprisingly there are those who were not aware of this in advance):
1. In the gardens
2. In education
The fact that Jews receive more awards wherever they are probably indicates a genetic advantage.
The fact that no one receives Nobel Prizes in certain cultures probably indicates a deficiency in education.
And I would hope to get a good answer from this Jewish genius
Depressing and funny statistics. To what extent should the American Nobel Prize winners who are considered Jews be considered Jews? They live the American life in a tenuous connection to their Jewishness. The Jews who study Judaism for the most part do not reach the Nobel topics at all. Why are there no Jewish winners from Morocco (not natives of Morocco in France) - simply because the culture there is not related to Nobel topics, including not the culture of the Jews there. And what exactly is a Jew in Einstein? Or a bowtie?
And besides, the article mixes important with prestigious. The Nobel Prizes are indeed prestigious, because they award a lot of money, but they are of no importance, because they always come after the work and when the work is already famous.
Ada Yonat is a Nobel Prize winner in chemistry and not in physics, as stated in the article. For the attention of the editor and writer
Haim:
You speak as if you oppose the words but in fact you agree with them.
Agnus claimed that Nobel Prize winners are a product of themselves and not of education.
I argued that this is not true and that education (and culture is part of education) has a great influence.
You said: not true, Michael! Culture has an impact!
Physicist (response 11):
You're with Agnus - so do you think the Muslims' problem with Nobel Prizes is genetic?
physicist (response 12)
If you agree with Chaim - read my answer to Chaim.
Ohad:
It may be very simple but also not true.
If the number of winners per capita among the residents of the State of Israel or among the Jews is higher than among the French or the Christians - it will remain so whether you consider the Arabs or not.
The number of winners per capita among the Jews is calculated by the number of Jewish winners divided by the number of Jews. This. The Arabs are not included in the calculation.
I said that you would give a numerical example - even a hypothetical one - with fabricated numbers to see what you mean (because if you mean the number of winners per person you are clearly wrong).
Michael,
Very simply, since a population of billions in the above mentioned countries has no effect at all or almost no effect on the number of winners (whose rate there tends to zero as mentioned), and on the other hand greatly reduces the percentage of Jews in the general population when it is included in the calculation (since these hardly ever live there), Examining the winning rates taking those countries into account provides a misleading result.
The relevant comparison is between the percentage of Jews in the West, and their proportion among all the winners in this region (which, as mentioned, constitute almost all the Nobel winners in general).
Michael? Have you checked that this is not the case? (I do not believe that this is the case at all, but how safe is it?). I think there is truth in what Chaim says. There are cultures that place obstacles left and right on the way to what we call progress.
I'm with Agnus. By the way, the education system in Israel is a whole world and it has quite a few islands of excellence. For example, there are high schools in Israel that are role models throughout the Western world. Another example: a significant part of the physics teachers in Israel are idealists who devote all their energy to the benefit of their students.
To Michael: Genetically no, but culturally yes.
Cultures that oppress women. A culture where murder is practiced for the honor of the family, murder as revenge. Can't grow a Nobel Prize candidate there.
Ohad:
Can you explain your claim numerically?
After all, it is clear that the number of winnings per capita does not change and it does not matter at all what total population you are looking at.
The article half-heartedly mentions that the comparison should be made mainly with the West, but the statistics presented still for some reason focus on the percentage of Jews in the global population. How many Nobel laureates were there in the 20th century from India, China and Africa (except South Africa)? And how many Jews are there? Obviously, when you remove them (and perhaps also South America, the Caribbean and the Arab world, places where the percentage of Jews is relatively low compared to the West before the Holocaust and the number of winners originating from there is zero), and refer mainly to Europe and the USA, the comparison is still flattering, but much less so.
Agnus:
Obviously, your claim is fundamentally flawed.
Do you think the minority of winners in the Muslim population is a genetic matter?
Agnus: Please read "outliers" by Malcolm Gladwell. He has an opinion opposite to yours and weighty arguments (and research).
Agnus, this is probably a misconception.
An example of this can be seen, for example, in the fact that researchers with a master's degree are forced to be waiters because a scholarship for a master's degree in faculties, some of which are scientific, this year was around NIS 2000. No matter how brilliant you are, it is very difficult to achieve scientific achievements when you work two-thirds of your competitors.
And one more thing - in the field of biology and chemistry, the equipment has not yet passed the required leap. A difference of a few years and a few tens of millions is a difference of a generation. A person who has to waste his time on outdated equipment, or alternatively does not have the technology to achieve achievements (for example a microscope with too low a resolution) this will prevent him from the next discovery. And in addition, without talking at all about the ultra-orthodox, although there are certainly some potential Nobel Prize winners, the vast majority of them cannot read English or have any scientific knowledge at all.
Or, it was obvious that someone would raise the scalding claims about the state of education today. The truth is that neither bears nor forests, the top elite from which the Nobel Prizes come will in any case continue to learn and succeed, and no matter what the results are in the various Mitzvah tests.
The education system does not create Nobel Prize winners, they create themselves. If someone comes and says that his education system was better, he would have won the Nobel Prize - he will laugh at himself knowing that.
A more direct and objective connection can be found in the level of income per capita
The higher the level of income, the higher the chance of achieving achievements.
Because the Jews would have gone in the direction of trade and economy and not into manual labor.
It is likely that they were also richer and more educated.
It is important to mention that there is a very low level of statistical significance here. If, God forbid, Ada Yonat was postponed to next year, say, then there would be a 20 percent (!!!!) drop in the number of Israeli winners. When the numbers are small, small changes lead to big relationships.
sic transit gloria mundi:
As far as Israel and Israelis are concerned - this preoccupation with Nobel and Wolf's statistics flatters the ego, but its significance is primarily historical, and in fact - anachronistic.
The reason is that the Israeli award winners of recent years are products of an education system of the XNUMXs and XNUMXs - a magnificent education system of which only a faint shadow remains today. Today's system, and even since the XNUMXs - did not and does not produce the winners that should have grown and won in ten or twenty years.