4 ms·
The article claims that family environment does matter, not that genes don't. I don't see the connection between genetic research and divine right theory - that
by dash2 4y ago
The article claims that family environment does matter, not that genes don't. I don't see the connection between genetic research and divine right theory - that seems like a big stretch. I also disagree that IQ tests are nonsense, why do you think that? They seem good at predicting many important social outcomes, so they must be capturing something.
- photochemsyn 4y agoThis has been discussed previously, but clearly people can study for IQ tests and improve their scores. Another issue is obvious: at what age does one start administering IQ tests? Can we distinguish the IQ of a baby at six months? At two years? At age 10? I'm not sure you read my full comment, as I do agree with the article's claim that parental involvement does matter in outcomes. I'm just pointing out the two poles of the 'nature vs. nuture' debate and what their historical roots are.
- dash2 4y agoThe fact that people can study doesn't mean they mostly do, or that this is an important confound. And why does it matter whether you can give a baby an IQ test? The same would hold for any exam or test at all.
- imbnwa 4y ago> They seem good at predicting many important social outcomes, so they must be capturing something. Is that 'something' a satisfactory control for genetic determinism? That seems to be what the comment was arguing, not 'nothing at all'