3 ms·
Probably goes without saying, but the g factor is so widely discredited as to be a strawman of IQ. Cars don't have an underlying s factor that determines how fa
by strken 3y ago
Probably goes without saying, but the g factor is so widely discredited as to be a strawman of IQ. Cars don't have an underlying s factor that determines how fast they go in all conditions with perfect correlation, and yet a measurement of their average performance on a set of tracks is still a useful measure for predicting performance on other tracks. So too for IQ and g factor.
Neither am I arguing for total genetic determinism, just that the statement "it may well be that there are genetic differences. but until we have proof..." is ignoring the very real proof that cognitive traits (IQ and Big 5) are heritable to some extent. Even Turkheimer grudgingly admits that if you grab a bunch of IQ-correlated SNPs they can "predict about 10 percent of the variance".
Weighing in on the 0% genetic side is an oddly strong position to hold, just as 100% would be.
- tptacek 3y agoHeritability isn't remotely the same thing as genetic determinism. Things can easily be heritable with virtually no direct biological causative mechanism at all (wearing lipstick, for instance). SES is heritable! Check the first article out. Turkheimer, for what it's worth, is a very big name in this research field.
- strken 3y agoOf course SES is heritable! If you believe IQ is heritable to a degree, genetic to a degree, and contributes to SES, then it's reasonable to expect SES to be both heritable and genetic to a degree. It would be surprising if there was some complicating factor that nullified the advantage from IQ but only in the case where the IQ-correlated SNPs were present.