5 ms·

The primary reason I was admitted into my local gifted program was because my parents and teachers pushed to get me into it. At age 6, I scored a high enough IQ

by bccdee 1y ago

The primary reason I was admitted into my local gifted program was because my parents and teachers pushed to get me into it. At age 6, I scored a high enough IQ to get in, but my family had to pay to have the test administered privately. The makeup of my cohort was mostly white and Asian, but they were also distinctly middle-to-upper-middle-class, with a high density of stay-at-home mothers (like my own) who were active in the school board and knew how to push the right buttons to get their kids into special programs. > I’ve never seen a satisfying explanation for why a supposedly unjust system, one assumed to disadvantage certain groups, would “accidentally” advantage Asians, often above native-born white students. Many immigrant groups have, on average, a higher socioeconomic status than native-born Americans. Even Black African immigrants tend to be more affluent than the mean of the white American population, because immigrating is expensive and it selects for wealth. My family are middle-class in North American, but they immigrated from South America, where were distinctly better-off than the average. Affluence has much more explanatory power than merit, especially in the absence of any mechanism for the supposed racial merit which the author of this newsletter seems to be ascribing to the Asian population.

lostmsu 1y ago
Your anecdote does not support your own conclusion, because it is very possible that affluence was obtained by parent's merit, and merit is highly hereditable.
- bccdee 1y ago
  > merit is highly hereditable That's a foolish statement on its face. "Merit" quantifies whether someone deserves something, and it depends both on the deserved thing and the rubric for judgment. Some forms of merit are fairly heritable (basketball skill) and others aren't (trivia knowledge). My grandparents didn't make money by passing admission exams for the grade 1 gifted program.
  - lostmsu 1y ago
    > quantifies whether someone deserves something That's one definition of the term, but this subthread is talking about the other ones. > Superior quality or worth; excellence > Demonstrated ability or achievement These are highly hereditable. > My grandparents didn't make money by passing admission exams for the grade 1 gifted program. It does not matter for the discussion. The point being discussed is whether skills or wealth came first, and heritability of skills indicate the first option. There's no data, including your grandparents, that would indicate the second one.
    - bccdee 1y ago
      "Demonstrated ability or achievement" is not highly hereditable. The word "demonstrated" should make that obvious. If I learn to play guitar and then have a kid, that kid will not know how to play guitar. Aptitudes may be heritable, but an aptitude is very different from a skill. Potential is only useful once it's been actualized, and doing that takes resources. > whether skills or wealth came first Wealth comes first. The son's education is paid for with his father's money. We aren't born with skills.
      - lostmsu 1y ago
        > "Demonstrated ability or achievement" is not highly hereditable. False > The word "demonstrated" should make that obvious. No, it should not. Try to explain why you believe that. > If I learn to play guitar and then have a kid, that kid will not know how to play guitar. You full well know this is not how this works. If you try to learn guitar and fail, there's a good chance your kid will also fail if tries. And if you try and become exceptional there's a good chance if your kid would try they would also play way above average. That's what hereditability means. > Wealth comes first. The son's education is paid for with his father's money. Here's a good obvious point as to why wealth does not come first (that unlike yours is undeniable): how did the first person obtain the skill? There was neither anyone to teach it, nor wealth to pay for it. > We aren't born with skills. We most certainly are born with skills. Speed of learning is a skill.
        bccdee 1y ago
greygoo222 1y ago
Affluent Black or Asian immigrants are typically high-skilled immigrants, a program that, by definition, screens for merit. Merit is heritable.
- bccdee 1y ago
  "Merit" is not a singular monolithic quality. Highly skilled immigrants have many meritorious qualities, like education and professional skills, which are not heritable and which cost money to acquire. Between an affluent child of average intellect and a clever child of modest means, both living in the developing world, the rich kid is much more likely to end up in America than the poor kid is. Gifted programs seek to screen for childhood intelligence, which is distinct both from being an immigrant and from having a good career. And, as I pointed out, being a smart kid is (in my experience) less of a factor in terms of being admitted to a gifted program than having attentive parents with free time and money.
  - greygoo222 1y ago
    Childhood intelligence is not exactly the same thing as the skills that allow you to immigrate, but it is highly, highly correlated. You can't just say "merit isn't a singular quality", you have to prove that the effect you see is due to wealth differences rather than merit differences.

by bccdee 1y ago

lostmsu 1y ago

Your anecdote does not support your own conclusion, because it is very possible that affluence was obtained by parent's merit, and merit is highly hereditable.

bccdee 1y ago
> merit is highly hereditable That's a foolish statement on its face. "Merit" quantifies whether someone deserves something, and it depends both on the deserved thing and the rubric for judgment. Some forms of merit are fairly heritable (basketball skill) and others aren't (trivia knowledge). My grandparents didn't make money by passing admission exams for the grade 1 gifted program.
- lostmsu 1y ago
  > quantifies whether someone deserves something That's one definition of the term, but this subthread is talking about the other ones. > Superior quality or worth; excellence > Demonstrated ability or achievement These are highly hereditable. > My grandparents didn't make money by passing admission exams for the grade 1 gifted program. It does not matter for the discussion. The point being discussed is whether skills or wealth came first, and heritability of skills indicate the first option. There's no data, including your grandparents, that would indicate the second one.
  - bccdee 1y ago
    "Demonstrated ability or achievement" is not highly hereditable. The word "demonstrated" should make that obvious. If I learn to play guitar and then have a kid, that kid will not know how to play guitar. Aptitudes may be heritable, but an aptitude is very different from a skill. Potential is only useful once it's been actualized, and doing that takes resources. > whether skills or wealth came first Wealth comes first. The son's education is paid for with his father's money. We aren't born with skills.
    - lostmsu 1y ago
      > "Demonstrated ability or achievement" is not highly hereditable. False > The word "demonstrated" should make that obvious. No, it should not. Try to explain why you believe that. > If I learn to play guitar and then have a kid, that kid will not know how to play guitar. You full well know this is not how this works. If you try to learn guitar and fail, there's a good chance your kid will also fail if tries. And if you try and become exceptional there's a good chance if your kid would try they would also play way above average. That's what hereditability means. > Wealth comes first. The son's education is paid for with his father's money. Here's a good obvious point as to why wealth does not come first (that unlike yours is undeniable): how did the first person obtain the skill? There was neither anyone to teach it, nor wealth to pay for it. > We aren't born with skills. We most certainly are born with skills. Speed of learning is a skill.
      - bccdee 1y ago

greygoo222 1y ago

Affluent Black or Asian immigrants are typically high-skilled immigrants, a program that, by definition, screens for merit. Merit is heritable.

bccdee 1y ago
"Merit" is not a singular monolithic quality. Highly skilled immigrants have many meritorious qualities, like education and professional skills, which are not heritable and which cost money to acquire. Between an affluent child of average intellect and a clever child of modest means, both living in the developing world, the rich kid is much more likely to end up in America than the poor kid is. Gifted programs seek to screen for childhood intelligence, which is distinct both from being an immigrant and from having a good career. And, as I pointed out, being a smart kid is (in my experience) less of a factor in terms of being admitted to a gifted program than having attentive parents with free time and money.
- greygoo222 1y ago
  Childhood intelligence is not exactly the same thing as the skills that allow you to immigrate, but it is highly, highly correlated. You can't just say "merit isn't a singular quality", you have to prove that the effect you see is due to wealth differences rather than merit differences.