Intelligence is Genetic

[maskedmelon]

Researchers have begun the work of identifying genetic contributors to intelligence. China has made some prominent steps into this field of research and elsewhere researchers have apparently (according to this article) linked over 500 genes to intelligence. So far those genes only account for about 10% of variation in mental acuity, but with previous and current twin studies suggesting genetics account for more than half of variation, there are sure to be more contributing genes and interplay uncovered in the near future. How do you feel about stupidity being certifiable? Please share your thoughts bElow.

https://www.technologyreview.com/s/610339/dna-tests-for-iq-are-coming-but-it-might-not-be-smart-to-take-one/

tldr: idiocy is genetic privilege.

[loramin]

Didn't read the article, but ...

1) "intelligence" as a thing does not exist. There are something like 6-10 different types of intelligence (different researchers disagree) and they many don't even correlate with each other. In other words, if you're "math smart" it does not necessarily mean you are "language smart" or "musically smart", so there is no (plain and simple) "smart".

2) Almost everything about humans is a combination of genetics and environment (nature and nurture), so even if there was a "general intelligence" it wouldn't be true to say "Intelligence is genetic". All you can say is "Each particular type of intelligence has both genetic and environmental components, and we now know that at least 10% of whatever type of intelligence they were studying is genetic"

[Baler]

Weren't IQ tests deemed racist? (this is a joke)

edit: mental acuity isn't the same as what the average person thinks of as 'intelligent'. it's part of the puzzle for sure though.

[katrik]

Didn't read the article, but ...

1) "intelligence" as a thing does not exist. There are something like 6-10 different types of intelligence (different researchers disagree) and they many don't even correlate with each other. In other words, if you're "math smart" it does not necessarily mean you are "language smart" or "musically smart", so there is no (plain and simple) "smart".

2) Almost everything about humans is a combination of genetics and environment (nature and nurture), so even if there was a "general intelligence" it wouldn't be true to say "Intelligence is genetic". All you can say is "Each particular type of intelligence has both genetic and environmental components, and we now know that at least 10% of whatever type of intelligence they were studying is genetic"

This. Both scientists and psychologists acknowledge that intelligence is a theory, and they have virtually no good way to test it (or if it exists). IQ tests have no scientific backing.

[loramin]

Weren't IQ tests deemed racist?

edit: mental acuity isn't the same as what the average person thinks of an intelligent.

Yes. Historically not just intelligence tests, but in fact any form of test (including stuff like the SATs) have been shown to be biased in favor of people who are more similar to the test's creator(s).

This is a simplistic example, but say you're a white professor from Harvard writing a test: you might think nothing of adding a question involving yachts. But if you're a student from a disadvantaged background you might have a harder time answering that question than the white kid from the nice part of town who goes yahting with his family.

There are also more directly racist tests, like the literacy tests applied to keep Southern blacks from voting. Such tests weren't inherently racist (they were just reading tests), but the racist part was that the white voters didn't have to take them.

Then there's also the (scientifically bogus) "science" of phrenology, and I'm sure there've been other racist intelligence stuff beyond that.

[katrik]

Weren't IQ tests deemed racist?

edit: mental acuity isn't the same as what the average person thinks of as 'intelligent'. it's part of the puzzle for sure though.

Yes. A child from a lower socio-economic background will never score as high as a privileged kid with both parents in the home. So, especially in schools, IQ testing can do more harm than good.

[skarlorn]

how does this factor in the power of epigenetics to radically change a person's genetic expression within one's own lifetime or close ancestors due to environmental exposures and intense emotional experiences?

it's like cool it's genetic but also our concept of genetics has just gotten thrown in the trash now that we know how much they can be adapted by behavior, habit, and environment

[Baler]

This is a simplistic example, but say you're a white professor from Harvard writing a test: you might think nothing of adding a question involving yachts. But if you're a student from a disadvantaged background you might have a harder time answering that question than the white kid from the nice part of town who goes yahting with his family.

sounds like it's the dummy's fault for not knowing what a yacht is.

But taking the easy way out and crying racism, unfair, privlege is faster for results than studying and absorbing information that's not about yeezys and crunk.

Yes. A child from a lower socio-economic background will never score as high as a privileged kid with both parents in the home. So, especially in schools, IQ testing can do more harm than good.

So bad parenting is not only the cause of kids bringing guns to school but is also a factor in how smart they turn out. That's not genetics that's parenting. wtf


---
Are genetics racist due to years of slavery amongts several cultures (not just America)

Wipe it clean 2018. A fresh start will fix everything.

[loramin]

sounds like it's the dummy's fault for not knowing what a yacht is.

But taking the easy way out and crying racism, unfair, privlege is faster for results than studying and absorbing information that's not about yeezys and crunk.

Well, instead of using biased groups like the socially disadvantaged vs. the rich, try different ones. If you're a Chinese (or French, or whatever) exchange student, you're going to have a harder time than an American when you take an American test right? Even if your English is perfect, there are all sorts of cultural idioms and bits of knowledge that you, as someone from a different culture, simply don't know. You're not stupid because of that, you're just from a different culture.

Now consider how practically different the life of someone growing up in Watts is vs. someone growing up in Atherton (the most expensive zip code in America). It's neither group's fault, and neither group is "better" (unless you think having more possessions makes a person better). They're just different cultures.

The problem is, due to the lack of diversity among people writing these tests, they reflect the culture of one group more than others. That's not in any way saying that the other groups sucks, or should magically know everything the other group know. It's the same as if a bunch of (English-speaking) French people gave tests here: we Americans would do worse not because we suck, but just because our culture is different from the test maker's.

[katrik]

So bad parenting is not only the cause of kids bringing guns to school but is also a factor in how smart they turn out. That's not genetics that's parenting. wtf


---
Are genetics racist due to years of slavery amongts several cultures (not just America)

Wipe it clean 2018. A fresh start will fix everything.

Focus, dear. Two different things.

[Baler]

Focus, dear. Two different things.

sorry I get excitable..

The Study in the OP is in china where they have a population over 1 billion. Different standards for living and over avg a much higher college success rate.
I don't think it's applicable to compare it to America. Also there was a period of time where china didn't communicate with the outside world. That is part of their genetics.

[loramin]

Are genetics racist due to years of slavery amongts several cultures (not just America)

This is actually an interesting point. African-Americans were effectively "bred", just like dogs, for a couple hundreds years or so. African-Americans who were smart, rebellious, etc. were killed (before making any babies), so there was in fact a selection factor guiding their evolution, and making the whole racial group more docile to some degree.

BUT, what you have to remember is, evolution takes a long fucking time. In fact, that was the crucial bit that let Darwin discover evolution: it wasn't until he understood how old the Earth was that he realized species could change over time.

So while there's little doubt that there was a (horrifying) selective force applied to the evolution of African-Americans, in practice that force was only applied for a very short time, in the evolutionary sense.

[loramin]

The Study in the OP is in china where they have a population over 1 billion. Different standards for living and over avg a much higher college success rate.
I don't think it's applicable to compare it to America. Also there was a period of time where china didn't communicate with the outside world. That is part of their genetics.

Keep in mind China might be one country, but it's not one gene pool. There were hundreds of different peoples that all got conquered over China's history, and they didn't all get killed, so their genes got mixed in.

So even if China barred entry to foreigners for a few years, A) they were plenty diverse to start, B) that period was only a tiny speck in terms of evolutionary time.

Honestly a much bigger "anti-diversity" effect came much earlier in China's history. Ghengis Khan had A LOT of offspring, so many in fact that like 1 in 200 people on the entire planet are descended from him (and obviously China has an even higher ratio).

[Baler]

Ghengis Khan had A LOT of offspring, so many in fact that like 1 in 200 people on the entire planet are descended from him (and obviously China has an even higher ratio).

This is actually a great point I'd totally forgotten about.

[maskedmelon]

Didn't read the article, but ...

1) "intelligence" as a thing does not exist. There are something like 6-10 different types of intelligence (different researchers disagree) and they many don't even correlate with each other. In other words, if you're "math smart" it does not necessarily mean you are "language smart" or "musically smart", so there is no (plain and simple) "smart".

Why didn't you just write that you have no idea what g is? You are free to disagree with the source(s) of g and shill whatever ideological delusions you liek in support of your position, but arguing that g doesn't exist is simply retarded. Your position is at odds with language, statistics and decades of psychometrics.

2) Almost everything about humans is a combination of genetics and environment (nature and nurture), so even if there was a "general intelligence" it wouldn't be true to say "Intelligence is genetic". All you can say is "Each particular type of intelligence has both genetic and environmental components, and we now know that at least 10% of whatever type of intelligence they were studying is genetic"


Absolutely agree with the initial premise of your first sentence, but everything thereafter is entirely wrong. I didn't say that intelligence was exclusively genetic, nor does the article make that claim. Not even the well established and uncontroversial understanding of the nature of g imply any such thing. Feel free to waylay the phantoms though.

[maskedmelon]

This is actually an interesting point. African-Americans were effectively "bred", just like dogs, for a couple hundreds years or so. African-Americans who were smart, rebellious, etc. were killed (before making any babies), so there was in fact a selection factor guiding their evolution, and making the whole racial group more docile to some degree.

BUT, what you have to remember is, evolution takes a long fucking time. In fact, that was the crucial bit that let Darwin discover evolution: it wasn't until he understood how old the Earth was that he realized species could change over time.

So while there's little doubt that there was a (horrifying) selective force applied to the evolution of African-Americans, in practice that force was only applied for a very short time, in the evolutionary sense.

is that why it failed to make them more docile?

[maskedmelon]

how does this factor in the power of epigenetics to radically change a person's genetic expression within one's own lifetime or close ancestors due to environmental exposures and intense emotional experiences?

it's like cool it's genetic but also our concept of genetics has just gotten thrown in the trash now that we know how much they can be adapted by behavior, habit, and environment

this is a good question and I believe the answer is: we don't know, just liek until these studies we had nothing concrete to link g to and even with the genes we've identified, we've only been able to account for roughly 10% of variability.

[loramin]

I didn't say that intelligence was exclusively genetic, nor does the article make that claim. Not even the well established and uncontroversial understanding of the nature of g imply any such thing. Feel free to waylay the phantoms though.

The title of your post was literally "Intelligence is Genetic", but sure I'm "waylaying phantoms" :rolleyes:

In other news, I miss the other melon; bring him back.

[katrik]

Have you guys heard of the “Bell Curve” research work written in the 90’s? It is been debunked to death. I’ll link some scholarly journals later.

[loramin]

Have you guys heard of the “Bell Curve” research work written in the 90’s? It is been debunked to death. I’ll link some scholarly journals later.

Yes, in fact that book (before it was debunked) is what caused me to do my high school senior thesis on intelligence testing, and that's when I learned about the multiple types of intelligence stuff.

[Wonkie]

there's more to life than masturbating, melon

[Patriam1066]

No shit melon, so is attractiveness

Close the borders, except to blondes

[maskedmelon]

The title of your post was literally "Intelligence is Genetic", but sure I'm "waylaying phantoms" :rolleyes:

I agree with you on both of these points.

In other news, I miss the other melon; bring him back.

I'm still here. I just learned from previous Loramin interactions that my behavior was emboldening and neither change nor progress were forthcoming, so I adopted a new approach (^.~)v not gonna let loramin get away with bullying anymore.

[maskedmelon]

there's more to life than masturbating, melon

it's not masturbating pokes. I was super excited at the prospect of humans taking evolution into our own hands, so I share it and all I get is some egalitarian appeal to delusion, " there is no smart."

do you realize what we could do with a planet full DaVincies? or even Js? ^^

No shit melon, so is attractiveness

Close the borders, except to blondes

sorry pats, it excited me. we are one step closer to making better people.

[skarlorn]

lol i seriously doubt we'll pull off eugenics without masking it as war or "natural disaster"

it's 2018 and people still think Hurricane Katrina wasn't implemented by the Chinese

[Wonkie]

it's not masturbating pokes. I was super excited at the prospect of humans taking evolution into our own hands, so I share it and all I get is some egalitarian appeal to delusion, " there is no smart."

do you realize what we could do with a planet full DaVincies? or even Js? ^^



sorry pats, it excited me. we are one step closer to making better people.

intelligence by rote only makes you an untermensch.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=iCCPXY__hhY

[Patriam1066]

intelligence by rote only makes you an untermensch.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=iCCPXY__hhY

Didn't click but I agree with your comment believe it or not

[Patriam1066]

it's not masturbating pokes. I was super excited at the prospect of humans taking evolution into our own hands, so I share it and all I get is some egalitarian appeal to delusion, " there is no smart."

do you realize what we could do with a planet full DaVincies? or even Js? ^^



sorry pats, it excited me. we are one step closer to making better people.

A planet full of mentally ill trannies who brag about fentanyl abuse on Everquest forums?

Wow sign me up, NOT

[maskedmelon]

intelligence by rote only makes you an untermensch.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=iCCPXY__hhY

I thumbed up this because I thought it was funny, but it's not the point in making. there are lots of other worthwhile traits beyond intelligence and as research advances i am sure we will uncover genetic basis for those as well.

also knowledge != intelligence

[Wonkie]

I thumbed up this because I thought it was funny, but it's not the point in making. there are lots of other worthwhile traits beyond intelligence and as research advances i am sure we will uncover genetic basis for those as well.

also knowledge != intelligence

despite my low irish birth I've become as clever as an italian

its not genetic

[Patriam1066]

despite my low irish birth I've become as clever as an italian

its not genetic

It's genetic bud you have that clever weasel quality of your south Italian forebears

[Swish2]

Cultural/national attitudes to education have a part to play in this too.

[Wonkie]

It's genetic bud you have that clever weasel quality of your south Italian forebears

autism knows no color

[Patriam1066]

autism knows no color

I have a cousin who looks Italian and is autistic

Really makes you think

[Saludeen]

Its somewhat genetic but people can still increase it with diet, exercise, and challenging themselves with learning new skills. And China is evil so that just sounds like conditioning for eugenicism.

[Saludeen]

But there's also a threshold of stupidity to where the person isn't smart enough to even begin increasing it, like Patriam1066.

[maskedmelon]

ive enjoyed patriam's character development actually ^^ it's been fun watching him grow from a novel socially conservative leftist to the uberalpha social zealot leftist unicorn he is now ^^ makes a lot of well reasoned points, but isn't very nice about them and is hateful sometimes.

[maskedmelon]

I agree though about augmenting inteliligence and the variation of limits across the general population.

[mickmoranis]

Democrats act like the taliban when it comes to talking about genetics.

They will behead you if you teach your kids that there is such thing as genetics.

They are anti intellectual.

Because of genetics.