5 ms·

Please then provide some references to the e literature you’ve read supporting your claim. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof as the saying goes.

mightyham 4y ago
https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/doc/10.1.1.372.6092 https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/doc/10.1.1.372.6092 Meta-analysis of the results of over six million participants tested for cognitive ability or aptitude that found a difference in average scores between Black and White individuals of 1.1 standard deviations. And if you are curious about the relationship between IQ and genetics this Wikipedia page has a ton of cited research: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritability_of_IQ https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritability_of_IQ Also I don't think I'm the one making extraordinary claims here...
- underlipton 4y ago
  That's not a genetic study. The authors specialize in organizational/management science. For the Wikipedia article, you should read it yourself. A ctrl-f for "no evidence" would do you well.
  - notsosec 4y ago
    It appears to be a meta-analysis of literature in the field of psychology.
  - mightyham 4y ago
    I fail to see how insulting the authors academic credentials brings more to this discussion than critiquing the methodology or providing a study to the contrary. I also have read the Wikipedia article and have no idea what you are talking about. Claiming there is "no evidence" to any of the sides of this very complex issue is utterly ridiculous.
    - underlipton 4y ago
      If the contention is that there is a genetic basis for differences in intelligence, a study that doesn't consider genetic evidence is a poor place to start. This is a methodological critique. From the article: >Mackintosh, Nisbett et al. and Flynn have all concluded that the slight correlation between g-loading and the test score gap offers no clue to the cause of the gap.[86][87][88] Further reviews of both adoption studies and racial admixture studies have also found no evidence for a genetic component behind group-level IQ differences.[89][90][91][92]
      - mightyham 4y ago
        The poster I originally responded to claimed there was "no scientific evidence" for differences in IQ being based on genetics. There is significant evidence for genetics being the largest reason for IQ differences between individuals. Regardless of the semantics of the quote you posted, a reading of the full article elucidates that there is an open debate as to what role genetics plays in group differences in IQ, with lots of varying opinions and evidence.
- lern_too_spel 4y ago
  South Korean IQs went up by an entire standard deviation for people born between 1970 and 1990. Japanese IQs went up by more than a standard deviation between 1940 and 1965. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0191886911001437 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S01918... If you truly believe your extraordinary claims, you must believe these countries performed large scale human genetic engineering during these periods in a conspiracy hidden from the rest of the world.
  - peterfirefly 4y ago
    South Korea and Japan had severely malnourished populations -- which was also reflected in their heights. Are you claiming that African-Americans are similarly malnourished? Would they become giants if, somehow, they could be properly fed?
    - lern_too_spel 4y ago
      I'm claiming that if they were properly educated, their intelligence would increase. Indeed, the gap between black American IQs and white American IQs has been steadily closing, with a 1/3 reduction between 1972 and 2002, the gap between black American IQs and white American IQs is smaller than the gap between black African IQs and white American IQs, and black Americans in 1995 have the same IQ as white Americans in 1945. This is explainable by reduction in school segregation and increases in white collar job opportunities for blacks in the US, leading to slow increases in education culture in black communities. There is a nutritional component as well, with the average heights of black males almost catching up to the average height of white males: https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Height-cm-of-Americans-by-race-and-gender-Source-NHANES-III_fig6_8251583 https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Height-cm-of-Americans-b... https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2019/06/heres-why-the-black-white-iq-gap-is-almost-certainly-environmental/ https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2019/06/heres-why-the...
      - peterfirefly 4y ago
        Ever heard of the Lothian Birth-Cohort Studies? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lothian_birth-cohort_studies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lothian_birth-cohort_studies IQ can be measured quite well at the age of 10-11, before the children have had much education. It also turns out to be quite stable... and doesn't really go up if somebody goes all the way to a bachelor's degree. This means that your education excuse either isn't true at all (most likely) or that it has really, really important, huge, big, great confounders (highly unlikely). Your height figure tells me that there really isn't much of a height difference between whites and blacks in the US. There is a clear (but small) height difference between age cohorts but it is utterly dwarfed by the differences between age cohorts in South Korea and Japan (and by the height differences between North Korea and South Korea). This means that your nutrition excuse either isn't true at all (most likely) or that it has really, really important, huge, big, great confounders (highly unlikely). Or maybe Watson was on to something, whether we like or not. You clearly don't, I don't either, and I am pretty sure Watson doesn't like it one bit either.
- phs318u 4y ago
  I don’t see anything in that met analysis relating to genetics. This is far more likely to be as a result of systemic racism in your country affecting outcomes from early learning onwards.
lolinder 4y ago
Claiming that the skills tested by IQ tests are in part heritable—like height, strength, weight, eye color and every other physical characteristic—is not an extraordinary claim. Indeed, the opposite claim would be more extraordinary. Why should this be the exception to the rule? It would be far more beneficial to equity to push back on the purported implications of this fact than to try to fight a losing battle against reality. The value we place on the skills that IQ tests measure is highly suspect and should be questioned, not the idea that IQ varies between populations.
- jojobas 4y ago
  >The value we place on the skills that IQ tests measure It's not even that. Imagine there is an isolated population on a remote island that is legitimately very low on general intelligence, "nobody can ever learn to count past ten" kinda low, yet undeniably human. What would be a reasonable policy toward such people?
  - Taywee 4y ago
    The same as you'd have to the severely mentally impaired in general, I imagine.
  - phs318u 4y ago
    To apologise for such a unidimensional interpretation of intelligence? Maybe they harness their intelligence to survival in their environment. What would the measure of such an intelligence be? What if you've never been posed a logical puzzle before, or even had a written language, just oral tradition. Are we saying that the western definition of intelligence discounts all other forms of mentation and application of that mentation to significant survival advantage? Perhaps these people score low on "curiosity" rather than intelligence per se? How do we even define intelligence in these discussions? Is Elon Musk intelligent? By some measures, clearly yes. By others, clearly not. What is the point of these discussions of not to partition the room? Personally, I'd like to see a broad-spectrum array of measures relating to different modes of mentation. Then we may be able to get somewhere. Until then, whenever I see a discussion mentioning "whites", "blacks", "Asians", "Africans" as if these are a homogenous mass (which is utterly ludicrous), then I'll continue to suspect ulterior motives.

mightyham 4y ago

https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/doc/10.1.1.372.6092 https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/doc/10.1.1.372.6092 Meta-analysis of the results of over six million participants tested for cognitive ability or aptitude that found a difference in average scores between Black and White individuals of 1.1 standard deviations. And if you are curious about the relationship between IQ and genetics this Wikipedia page has a ton of cited research: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritability_of_IQ https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritability_of_IQ Also I don't think I'm the one making extraordinary claims here...

underlipton 4y ago
That's not a genetic study. The authors specialize in organizational/management science. For the Wikipedia article, you should read it yourself. A ctrl-f for "no evidence" would do you well.
- notsosec 4y ago
  It appears to be a meta-analysis of literature in the field of psychology.
- mightyham 4y ago
  I fail to see how insulting the authors academic credentials brings more to this discussion than critiquing the methodology or providing a study to the contrary. I also have read the Wikipedia article and have no idea what you are talking about. Claiming there is "no evidence" to any of the sides of this very complex issue is utterly ridiculous.
  - underlipton 4y ago
    If the contention is that there is a genetic basis for differences in intelligence, a study that doesn't consider genetic evidence is a poor place to start. This is a methodological critique. From the article: >Mackintosh, Nisbett et al. and Flynn have all concluded that the slight correlation between g-loading and the test score gap offers no clue to the cause of the gap.[86][87][88] Further reviews of both adoption studies and racial admixture studies have also found no evidence for a genetic component behind group-level IQ differences.[89][90][91][92]
    - mightyham 4y ago
      The poster I originally responded to claimed there was "no scientific evidence" for differences in IQ being based on genetics. There is significant evidence for genetics being the largest reason for IQ differences between individuals. Regardless of the semantics of the quote you posted, a reading of the full article elucidates that there is an open debate as to what role genetics plays in group differences in IQ, with lots of varying opinions and evidence.
lern_too_spel 4y ago
South Korean IQs went up by an entire standard deviation for people born between 1970 and 1990. Japanese IQs went up by more than a standard deviation between 1940 and 1965. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0191886911001437 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S01918... If you truly believe your extraordinary claims, you must believe these countries performed large scale human genetic engineering during these periods in a conspiracy hidden from the rest of the world.
- peterfirefly 4y ago
  South Korea and Japan had severely malnourished populations -- which was also reflected in their heights. Are you claiming that African-Americans are similarly malnourished? Would they become giants if, somehow, they could be properly fed?
  - lern_too_spel 4y ago
    I'm claiming that if they were properly educated, their intelligence would increase. Indeed, the gap between black American IQs and white American IQs has been steadily closing, with a 1/3 reduction between 1972 and 2002, the gap between black American IQs and white American IQs is smaller than the gap between black African IQs and white American IQs, and black Americans in 1995 have the same IQ as white Americans in 1945. This is explainable by reduction in school segregation and increases in white collar job opportunities for blacks in the US, leading to slow increases in education culture in black communities. There is a nutritional component as well, with the average heights of black males almost catching up to the average height of white males: https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Height-cm-of-Americans-by-race-and-gender-Source-NHANES-III_fig6_8251583 https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Height-cm-of-Americans-b... https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2019/06/heres-why-the-black-white-iq-gap-is-almost-certainly-environmental/ https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2019/06/heres-why-the...
    - peterfirefly 4y ago
      Ever heard of the Lothian Birth-Cohort Studies? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lothian_birth-cohort_studies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lothian_birth-cohort_studies IQ can be measured quite well at the age of 10-11, before the children have had much education. It also turns out to be quite stable... and doesn't really go up if somebody goes all the way to a bachelor's degree. This means that your education excuse either isn't true at all (most likely) or that it has really, really important, huge, big, great confounders (highly unlikely). Your height figure tells me that there really isn't much of a height difference between whites and blacks in the US. There is a clear (but small) height difference between age cohorts but it is utterly dwarfed by the differences between age cohorts in South Korea and Japan (and by the height differences between North Korea and South Korea). This means that your nutrition excuse either isn't true at all (most likely) or that it has really, really important, huge, big, great confounders (highly unlikely). Or maybe Watson was on to something, whether we like or not. You clearly don't, I don't either, and I am pretty sure Watson doesn't like it one bit either.
phs318u 4y ago
I don’t see anything in that met analysis relating to genetics. This is far more likely to be as a result of systemic racism in your country affecting outcomes from early learning onwards.

lolinder 4y ago

Claiming that the skills tested by IQ tests are in part heritable—like height, strength, weight, eye color and every other physical characteristic—is not an extraordinary claim. Indeed, the opposite claim would be more extraordinary. Why should this be the exception to the rule? It would be far more beneficial to equity to push back on the purported implications of this fact than to try to fight a losing battle against reality. The value we place on the skills that IQ tests measure is highly suspect and should be questioned, not the idea that IQ varies between populations.

jojobas 4y ago
>The value we place on the skills that IQ tests measure It's not even that. Imagine there is an isolated population on a remote island that is legitimately very low on general intelligence, "nobody can ever learn to count past ten" kinda low, yet undeniably human. What would be a reasonable policy toward such people?
- Taywee 4y ago
  The same as you'd have to the severely mentally impaired in general, I imagine.
- phs318u 4y ago
  To apologise for such a unidimensional interpretation of intelligence? Maybe they harness their intelligence to survival in their environment. What would the measure of such an intelligence be? What if you've never been posed a logical puzzle before, or even had a written language, just oral tradition. Are we saying that the western definition of intelligence discounts all other forms of mentation and application of that mentation to significant survival advantage? Perhaps these people score low on "curiosity" rather than intelligence per se? How do we even define intelligence in these discussions? Is Elon Musk intelligent? By some measures, clearly yes. By others, clearly not. What is the point of these discussions of not to partition the room? Personally, I'd like to see a broad-spectrum array of measures relating to different modes of mentation. Then we may be able to get somewhere. Until then, whenever I see a discussion mentioning "whites", "blacks", "Asians", "Africans" as if these are a homogenous mass (which is utterly ludicrous), then I'll continue to suspect ulterior motives.