Intelligence 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.

[loramin]

Originally Posted by Baler [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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.

[Baler]

Originally Posted by loramin [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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.

Originally Posted by katrik [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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]

Originally Posted by Baler [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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.

[loramin]

Originally Posted by Baler [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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.

[maskedmelon]

Originally Posted by loramin [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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?

[katrik]

Originally Posted by Baler [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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.

[katrik]

Originally Posted by Baler [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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]

Originally Posted by katrik [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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]

Originally Posted by Baler [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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).