> But we are too afraid to talk about anything beyond these few topics[...] I’ll grant that serious scientists are cautious about this, but what’s your evidenc

> But we are too afraid to talk about anything beyond these few topics[...] I’ll grant that serious scientists are cautious about this, but what’s your evidence that the caution has gone too far? We know that traits like intelligence are affected by hundreds or thousands of distinct genetic loci. We know that traits like measured intelligence are hugely dependent on non-genetic factors like diet, environmental exposures, and poverty (and that these factors aren’t orthogonal to each other). And we also know that scientists in the past have made too-sweeping claims that in the light of modern data are considered not just wrong, but embarrassingly so, and that these claims have been weaponized by overzealous lay people. Given all that, I think it’s quite reasonable to be very cautious about making claims that there’s not great evidence to support.