sfblah

17 ms·

211.
by sfblah 4y ago
High SES correlates with IQ, so you're just measuring the same thing, going round and round in circles. You're just grasping at straws trying to find some arguments that allow you to invalidate the obvious null hypothesis. You&#x2
212.
by sfblah 4y ago
You're a funny person. Have you never even heard of "cancel culture"? The world must be super confusing to people who think the issue with IQ research is "lack of rigor." It's not lack of rigor, it's the (
213.
by sfblah 4y ago
I actually like the nuance of your point. I think you're aiming at a certain circularity in the definition of intelligence. Namely, we know that there are a set of cognitive abilities which set certain people apart in society as those
214.
by sfblah 4y ago
Reading about the latest racist is sort of boring. It's like reading about how MLK was a philanderer and a plagiarist or how Michael Jackson may or may not have been a pedophile. It's beside the point. I'd rather focus on peo
215.
by sfblah 4y ago
No. This definition of heritability is an obvious wokeism. https://www.etymonline.com/word/heritable#:~:text=%22capable... . https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/heritabi... The
216.
by sfblah 4y ago
I mean, just google `cognitive psychology iq` and you'll see that's false. It is used when folks can "get away with it." The issue isn't that there's some principled rejection of intelligence testing. It's
217.
by sfblah 4y ago
Because we don't know how to do that yet. But, eventually we will, and that will put this matter to rest.
218.
by sfblah 4y ago
It says I know not to feed trolls, and you're a troll.
219.
by sfblah 4y ago
This heritability redefinition thing is just a bad-faith move by people on the left to avoid the debate in my opinion. The standard historical understanding of the word "heritability" is exactly what you said. It's like redef
220.
by sfblah 4y ago
For completeness, it appears HN prevents you from replying to a post until it's been there for something like 15 minutes. I mistakenly interpreted that as a thread limit. Responding to your message below. It is the case, as you can see
221.
by sfblah 4y ago
Great arguments. Can you give an example of an environment that would enable a cat to play chess as well as me? No? Then there must be a genetic component to IQ.
222.
by sfblah 4y ago
I don't know much about Richard Lynn, but I like your use of the notion that he's "disgraced." It reminds me of Mao's China. A point I'd make is this: It's obvious from what you wrote that you're left
223.
by sfblah 4y ago
Fine. 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, i
224.
by sfblah 4y ago
The point of my anecdata isn't to prove a theory. It's to demonstrate that the burden of proof should be on those claiming intelligence is environmental. If that's your theory, then how do you explain my experience? I agree t
225.
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 rig
226.
by sfblah 4y ago
I appreciate that I think you've acknowledged that genetic factors play a role in mental abilities. Debating the question of whether there's a single factor at play or multiple factors is a reasonable thing to do. Regardless of th
227.
by sfblah 4y ago
No, I succeeded.
228.
by sfblah 4y ago
Mostly I just want to make the argument below to see how/if you'll respond. In general, I just don't think you're arguing in good faith. The reason IQ isn't studied isn't because it's "not useful.&quo
229.
by sfblah 4y ago
I'm not interested in formulating an argument against, say, the efficacy of secondary education using the same methodology as Ned Block, because to do so would take something like 20,000 words, and then you'd just reject it anyway
230.
by sfblah 4y ago
I'm repeating it because it's important.
231.
by sfblah 4y ago
Why are you looking so hard for ghosts in the machine here?
232.
by sfblah 4y ago
We are actually at the thread limit. Here's how it works: You can reply to me, but I can't reply to you, since your message is the one that causes us to hit the limit. I don't think we're really having a productive discu
233.
by sfblah 4y ago
Sorry, we're at the thread depth limit here, but in brief, I simply disagree with your assertion that IQ isn't primarily genetic. I enjoyed your exhortation to agree with you ("please reconsider"). It reminded me of one
234.
by sfblah 4y ago
We've reached the maxiumum thread depth, but in brief: Your two comments directly contradict one another. You wrote: > I don't understand how your logic holds together once you concede that heritability doesn't mean "
235.
by sfblah 4y ago
Good questions. I believe it is worth studying and debating the definition of intelligence. I believe modern IQ tests do a reasonable job of crystallizing a value which is both meaningful and useful. In general, the goal is to quantify an i
236.
by sfblah 4y ago
Your first sentence is a complete misread of my comment, so I'm not going to reply. I said exactly the opposite of what you claim I said. Please re-read what I wrote and try again. Edit: I read a bit of Ned Block's piece. I believ
237.
by sfblah 4y ago
IQ testing has numerous applications. For example: * SAT tests largely amount to IQ tests and are used extensively for college admissions in the US. College degrees from top US universities remain the most sought after degrees in the world.
238.
by sfblah 4y ago
I was using "heritable" as a synonym for "genetically determined." Thanks for the clarification. To be a bit more specific, it is obviously possible to environmentally lower someone's IQ from their genetic potential
239.
by sfblah 4y ago
There aren't that many, but here's one: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S01602... It's a twin study. Here's a quote: "Mean IQ scores were modestly higher am
240.
by sfblah 4y ago
The following is my opinion, based on my research: * IQ is real, measurable and heritable. The evidence for this is overwhelming. * Nobody argues about the broad heritability of other human traits such as hair/eye color, height, athlet

More ›