3 ms·

It is more than unconvincing. It is outright misleading. The idea that scientific investigations are refuting the idea that these skills are learnable is false.

It is more than unconvincing. It is outright misleading. The idea that scientific investigations are refuting the idea that these skills are learnable is false. It doesn't make much effort to find studies to the contrary. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4056179/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4056179/ It also goes against common sense. Math, reading, and so many things are all learned, but frequently used by people who have a high IQ. Are we to assume that these things are not learned, because the author thinks IQ is the cause of reading skill, math, and similar things? I've bothered going through the labor to learn the skill. I've seen my baseline measurement of recall ability improved by the training time I invested in learning the skill. I haven't bothered to get to a competitive level, but I don't need to do so to be certain that humans can learn skills by practicing them with the intention to improve. The skeptic is just wrong. People can learn to improve their memory.

paulpauper 5y ago
Consider that people with higher IQs have greater proficiency at math and reading (such as SAT scores) despite everyone regardless of IQ having some ability.
- JoshCole 5y ago
  Yes, but that doesn't reflect the inability to learn. You're confusing cumulative advantage leading to a competitive edge with an inability of lower IQ humans to learn advanced skills. You will also find things like richness and beauty positively associated with winning competitions too. That you will find this doesn't mean memory can't be improved. It reflect cumulative advantage more generally. It is one of the reasons for the cognitive bias of the halo effect, a statistical side effect of the principles underlying the Matthew Effect. Edges are edges. Critically, that doesn't mean that the skills aren't learnable. It means that people with the most advantages can exploit those advantages to gain a greater deal of advantage than someone who has less advantage.

paulpauper 5y ago

Consider that people with higher IQs have greater proficiency at math and reading (such as SAT scores) despite everyone regardless of IQ having some ability.

JoshCole 5y ago
Yes, but that doesn't reflect the inability to learn. You're confusing cumulative advantage leading to a competitive edge with an inability of lower IQ humans to learn advanced skills. You will also find things like richness and beauty positively associated with winning competitions too. That you will find this doesn't mean memory can't be improved. It reflect cumulative advantage more generally. It is one of the reasons for the cognitive bias of the halo effect, a statistical side effect of the principles underlying the Matthew Effect. Edges are edges. Critically, that doesn't mean that the skills aren't learnable. It means that people with the most advantages can exploit those advantages to gain a greater deal of advantage than someone who has less advantage.