4 ms·

A common liberal blind spot is the genetic basis of intelligence and other aptitudes, and the extent to which that determines life outcomes.

• asgard1024 11y ago
  I consider myself liberal yet I don't agree with it, though you're right, there are many elitist liberals around. I think they are easily spotted by their opposition to direct democracy. And I actually think we should always assume "nurture". My reasoning is when you assume "nature", that's a dead end. This is a similar argument to whether the world is knowable - assuming it is will get you further.
  • nitrogen 11y ago
    How is that a dead end? I have greater confidence in humanity's ability to find a genetic therapy to boost intelligence than its ability to compensate for bad parenting and culture.
    • asgard1024 11y ago
      Assuming the current level of technology of course - I don't think there is anyone who successfully improved their own intelligence with biotechnology. Once there is such therapy, it simply becomes "nurture". But I am not sure that even matters, people are creative and they will find a way to blame unsuccessful people or nations for systemic failures. Genetic therapy as our future? It's likely you will get choices like "you can have 1 more IQ point, bigger toenails and 10% higher risk of cardiovascular disease after 50". On the other hand, you can do this today, and pick an intelligent partner to have kids with. And people do and we have empirical evidence of growing IQ (but actually it is explained by nurture) - regardless some still talk about how Idiocracy is our future.