4 ms·

I will not start a discussion around the validity of research because that conversation belongs in academic peer review and at this level it is pointless and it

I will not start a discussion around the validity of research because that conversation belongs in academic peer review and at this level it is pointless and it will end nowhere. But feel free to look for studies on these topics and form your own opinion: - Proper nutrition helps IQ. Iodine consumption helps IQ. - Poor health conditions, including presence of sub-saharan parasites, lowers IQ. - Lead poisoning (e.g: lead-based paint and mining activities) lowers IQ.

Hasknewbie 9y ago
A couple of other points: 1) Kind of self-evident, but variations among individuals is much larger than between populations, i.e. if you meet someone from a population where the IQ is lower, does not mean that person has a lower IQ. 2) A corollary of the impact of upbringing and the environment: if IQ is mostly stable/fixed at the individual level, this is not the case for a population average over time. For example Western IQ was much lower a few generations ago ("Flynn effect"). So it's possible that the populations who score lower today will catch up if their condition improves.
- partycoder 9y ago
  Also the fact that IQ is a very relative scale. IQ = 100 is defined as the median IQ, and as the median moves the meaning of IQ = 100 is redefined. 15 points of IQ is defined as 1 sd. And again, as variance changes, the equivalence of IQ points changes as well.
SamReidHughes 9y ago
Yeah, and, What I'm asking is, why wouldn't Africans, let's say, from a particular country, have a genetic intelligence advantage hidden by these factors. After all, Western society has been quite dysgenic lately. But somehow I get the sense what your wording has revealed is that you have some expectation that will make you comfortable, like equality or it being relatively close, and then you've gone on to seek out explanations that satisfy you, and then stopped. It sounds like a bunch of feel good story-telling.
- partycoder 9y ago
  You failed to refute the point by trying to start a frivolous discussion about the statistics, so now we are moving to ad-hominem. Well done. Let's do it. rubs hands What I have to say about is: that's just your opinion. The opinion of someone with a very vague, indirect, uncommitted language. Just say what you really mean, and why. I have an idea of what it might be, but it would better if you said it: - Elaborate a bit more on how Western society has been "dysgenic". Are you trying to push for eugenics here on HN? - Elaborate a bit more on what do you mean by "lately".
  - SamReidHughes 9y ago
    Western society is dysgenic because career women put off having children and have fewer of them. Lately.
    - partycoder 9y ago
      But fewer children does not necessarily mean fewer genetic diversity as population is now higher. So where is the "accumulation of disadvantageous genetic traits" (definition of dysgenics) here? I am sure that's not what you really meant. Try again.
      - SamReidHughes 9y ago
        What. Stupid people outbreeding smart ones. That's where.

Hasknewbie 9y ago

A couple of other points: 1) Kind of self-evident, but variations among individuals is much larger than between populations, i.e. if you meet someone from a population where the IQ is lower, does not mean that person has a lower IQ. 2) A corollary of the impact of upbringing and the environment: if IQ is mostly stable/fixed at the individual level, this is not the case for a population average over time. For example Western IQ was much lower a few generations ago ("Flynn effect"). So it's possible that the populations who score lower today will catch up if their condition improves.

partycoder 9y ago
Also the fact that IQ is a very relative scale. IQ = 100 is defined as the median IQ, and as the median moves the meaning of IQ = 100 is redefined. 15 points of IQ is defined as 1 sd. And again, as variance changes, the equivalence of IQ points changes as well.

SamReidHughes 9y ago

Yeah, and, What I'm asking is, why wouldn't Africans, let's say, from a particular country, have a genetic intelligence advantage hidden by these factors. After all, Western society has been quite dysgenic lately. But somehow I get the sense what your wording has revealed is that you have some expectation that will make you comfortable, like equality or it being relatively close, and then you've gone on to seek out explanations that satisfy you, and then stopped. It sounds like a bunch of feel good story-telling.

partycoder 9y ago
You failed to refute the point by trying to start a frivolous discussion about the statistics, so now we are moving to ad-hominem. Well done. Let's do it. rubs hands What I have to say about is: that's just your opinion. The opinion of someone with a very vague, indirect, uncommitted language. Just say what you really mean, and why. I have an idea of what it might be, but it would better if you said it: - Elaborate a bit more on how Western society has been "dysgenic". Are you trying to push for eugenics here on HN? - Elaborate a bit more on what do you mean by "lately".
- SamReidHughes 9y ago
  Western society is dysgenic because career women put off having children and have fewer of them. Lately.
  - partycoder 9y ago
    But fewer children does not necessarily mean fewer genetic diversity as population is now higher. So where is the "accumulation of disadvantageous genetic traits" (definition of dysgenics) here? I am sure that's not what you really meant. Try again.
    - SamReidHughes 9y ago
      What. Stupid people outbreeding smart ones. That's where.