5 ms·

What's the conclusion everyone is missing? I'm sure you know how unscientific IQ tests are, I'm surprised that's what you're bringing up here as being "good sc

by dmbche 3y ago

What's the conclusion everyone is missing? I'm sure you know how unscientific IQ tests are, I'm surprised that's what you're bringing up here as being "good science" being shut down politically. Just trying to correlatw the two tests they used is absolutely subjective, I would take a step back and reexamine the parts of those studies that convinced you of whatever beliefs you have - it seems like a shoddy foundation.

EnigmaFlare 3y ago
IQ test have genuine predictive power when applied to large groups. So no, they're not unscientific. In fact, the idea of IQ tests being useless or culturally biased is a now-outdated excuse that people used to use to justify the different results between ethic groups. It's now well accepted that different ethnic groups have different average IQs, and that IQ is a useful predictor of various life outcomes. What the politically-motivated researchers don't agree on is whether that's entirely environmental or partly genetic. Everyone agrees that it's at least partly environmental. There's honestly no evidence for the environmental-only theory of intelligence. That's the popular politically correct belief but every study I've ever seen or heard of either fails to support it or supports the opposite.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- pasabagi 3y ago
  In general the thing people find obnoxious about this kind of argument is that both 'race' and 'IQ' have their origin in eugenics, but are meaningless in genetics. The genetic variation across one race (say black) is much greater than the variation between races. There are no well-established genetic predictors of IQ. So, even if you do find evidence that there is a statistical correlation between these two unscientific and essentially meaningless concepts, your correlation is equally unscientific and meaningless.
  - biorach 3y ago
    Thank you
  - Vecr 3y ago
    Can't you train a predictor on skull shape/bone length and IQ and go from there? Yeah there's no causation there, but you should be able to give a percentage that someone's IQ is above a certain number depending on high-rez MRI scan input of skull and bone length measurements.
    - actionfromafar 3y ago
      Or make asset worth a predictor.
    - pasabagi 3y ago
      You can train a predictor on anything: that's how the famous cases of 'racist AI' came about. The point is, you can't establish a causal relationship without accounting for confounders. If you're starting with a question established by racists, with 'race' and 'IQ' as your two poles, and human populations as your data, good luck managing that.
  - te_chris 3y ago
    This guy clearly is just trying to bang on about racial superiority but coaxing it in terms of "they won't let us say the thing". Your response neatly shuts him down. Well done.
    - ectopasm83 3y ago
      [dead]
    - EnigmaFlare 2y ago
      Shut me down by saying false things? Why do you believe IQ is unscientific? It's routinely used by scientists for science and has falsifiable predictive power, which distinguishes it from unscientific things like astrology and homeopathy. Race isn't unscientific either - even if we're talking about the classic 3 races (which is not actually how people use the word anyway), they do in fact correspond to broad common genetic histories. Yes, they're an artificial classification people invented, but species are also an artificial classification. Neither is capable of classifying every individual and neither is unscientific because both are well enough defined to be useful to make predictions from.

by dmbche 3y ago

EnigmaFlare 3y ago

IQ test have genuine predictive power when applied to large groups. So no, they're not unscientific. In fact, the idea of IQ tests being useless or culturally biased is a now-outdated excuse that people used to use to justify the different results between ethic groups. It's now well accepted that different ethnic groups have different average IQs, and that IQ is a useful predictor of various life outcomes. What the politically-motivated researchers don't agree on is whether that's entirely environmental or partly genetic. Everyone agrees that it's at least partly environmental. There's honestly no evidence for the environmental-only theory of intelligence. That's the popular politically correct belief but every study I've ever seen or heard of either fails to support it or supports the opposite.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
pasabagi 3y ago
In general the thing people find obnoxious about this kind of argument is that both 'race' and 'IQ' have their origin in eugenics, but are meaningless in genetics. The genetic variation across one race (say black) is much greater than the variation between races. There are no well-established genetic predictors of IQ. So, even if you do find evidence that there is a statistical correlation between these two unscientific and essentially meaningless concepts, your correlation is equally unscientific and meaningless.
- biorach 3y ago
  Thank you
- Vecr 3y ago
  Can't you train a predictor on skull shape/bone length and IQ and go from there? Yeah there's no causation there, but you should be able to give a percentage that someone's IQ is above a certain number depending on high-rez MRI scan input of skull and bone length measurements.
  - actionfromafar 3y ago
    Or make asset worth a predictor.
  - pasabagi 3y ago
    You can train a predictor on anything: that's how the famous cases of 'racist AI' came about. The point is, you can't establish a causal relationship without accounting for confounders. If you're starting with a question established by racists, with 'race' and 'IQ' as your two poles, and human populations as your data, good luck managing that.
- te_chris 3y ago
  This guy clearly is just trying to bang on about racial superiority but coaxing it in terms of "they won't let us say the thing". Your response neatly shuts him down. Well done.
  - ectopasm83 3y ago
    [dead]
  - EnigmaFlare 2y ago
    Shut me down by saying false things? Why do you believe IQ is unscientific? It's routinely used by scientists for science and has falsifiable predictive power, which distinguishes it from unscientific things like astrology and homeopathy. Race isn't unscientific either - even if we're talking about the classic 3 races (which is not actually how people use the word anyway), they do in fact correspond to broad common genetic histories. Yes, they're an artificial classification people invented, but species are also an artificial classification. Neither is capable of classifying every individual and neither is unscientific because both are well enough defined to be useful to make predictions from.