4 ms·
You're advancing a theory that it's not genetic. I've offered a counterexample. I can offer others. For example, Kim Peek. Are you seriously going to argue that
by sfblah 4y ago
You're advancing a theory that it's not genetic. I've offered a counterexample. I can offer others. For example, Kim Peek. Are you seriously going to argue that any person could be like him if they were just raised in the right environment? You're absolutely gaslighting.
- tptacek 4y agoI'm in fact not doing that, and have said so repeatedly. My position in this thread is that you are wrong, and have produced faulty evidence for your arguments. It's not that I have a countervailing argument. I don't care about the rest of your theories.
- sfblah 4y agoFine. I think the prior should be it's genetic. You (I think) think it shouldn't. I think we can probably leave it there. Just to be crystal clear what I mean by "prior": I'm talking about the null hypothesis. So, if you were an ancient Greek studying physics, the prior should be that gravity is a force/acceleration pointing downward, not upward. Yes, someone could argue gravity points upward, but such a claim would require evidence. Arguing it points downward imposes no such requirement, because it's obvious to any casual observer. IQ is obviously genetic, because cats have lower IQs than humans and cats have significantly different genetics than humans.