Intelligence isn't genetic

submitted by Chipit from i.redd.it

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]whereswhat 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (41 children)

What a spectacularly stupid insinuation.

Dogs != humans.

Maybe if you had a better education you would understand more about how humans learn and perceive intelligence.

[–]Zahn 17 insightful - 1 fun17 insightful - 0 fun18 insightful - 1 fun -  (22 children)

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2018/03/12/dna-tests-can-predict-intelligence-scientists-show-first-time/

You're pretty quick to ad hominem. Makes me wonder about your own intelligence level. It's ok if you can't science but you can't be cherry picking if you believe science or not once it doesn't fit your narrow minded viewpoint of the world.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/2163484-found-more-than-500-genes-that-are-linked-to-intelligence/

[–]whereswhat 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (21 children)

Ad hominem? Seems a stretch to me. My quip about education was to highlight how nurture can be more important than nature.

Contrary to your apparent assumption, I don't deny that genetics dictate what our brains are capable of. That doesn't end the discussion on the importance of nature versus nurture though. For examlple, a poorly trained neural net still performs just as poorly when run on a super-computer or a desktop PC. By analogy, the same is true for both human and dog brains. Overall brain power is only useful if the brain is taught to do useful things.

The big difference between human and dog brains is the physical architecture. Variations in human intelligence are relatively small compared to that of dogs because our baseline intelligence is so much higher (due to completely different architecture).

Both of the sources you linked acknowledge that nurture plays a significant role in "intelligence" levels. There are so many other studies to consider though (you may want to check out some of the twin studies that have been done). Most of the available evidence suggests that with the right nurture, almost any human can become a positive contributor to society.

[–]Chipit[S] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (20 children)

So there is little difference between the humans who watch Jerry Springer and those who read The Atlantic?

I'll inform the Atlantic readers at once that they are quite similar. Do you think they will agree?

[–]bobbobbybob 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think that people get "created equal in the eyes of god" and "made exactly the same apart from skin color" confused

[–]whereswhat 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (18 children)

There is little difference in the genetically determined architecture of their brains, yes. There are likely significant differences in how their brains have developed after they were born though. I don't care if they agree and am not going to speculate on that.

[–]Chipit[S] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (17 children)

So, Atlantic readers and Jerry Springer watchers are the same? Come on, that's a lie and you know it.

You can't make unintelligent people intelligent by raising them, neither can you make intelligent people stupid.

I thought we all despised stupid people, did that change?

[–]whereswhat 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (16 children)

You can't make unintelligent people intelligent by raising them, neither can you make intelligent people stupid.

Did you even read my comment?

So, Atlantic readers and Jerry Springer watchers are the same?

Don't put words in my mouth please. Details matter. Genetics plays no role in determining one's likelihood of being a Jerry Springer fan. Once someone is a Jerry Springer fan, however, the damage is probly done and I agree there is likely no hope.

[–]Zahn 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

It's estimated an average person can only gain 5 Iq points via education/environment. The majority of intelligence is inherited.

This is so obvious that I'm concerned with your attempts at explaining it away with so much extraneous complication. Many of your explanations play only a minor role. Quora had some unusual alacrity on this topic: https://www.quora.com/Can-I-raise-my-IQ-by-becoming-more-educated

[–]H3v8 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It's estimated an average person can only gain 5 Iq points via education/environment.

There are countries where the prevalent concept is that everyone should go to university and get a degree and intelligence doesn't matter. Parents spend a fortune on private tutors and private schools to get their offspring into university, and even then you end up with young adults who are clearly not able to grasp slightly complex concepts or even write a small essay. While other kids study on their own and succeed using minimal means.

However, because society thinks that intelligence doesn't matter, we end up with all of them treated the same, getting the same degree through a system of corruption and favoritism, and the result is the global crisis we witness these days.

On the other hand, nobody says that everyone can be a football player because genetics don't matter, and the crowds worship athletes who are often unable to utter a coherent sentence. Sometimes they are elected as MPs and the result is embarrassing.

EDIT: I should add that I'm talking about relatively racially homogenous countries, and what I described is not US-specific.

[–]whereswhat 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Are we equating IQ with intelligence now?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_intelligence

What are you concerned about? This is a complex subject. Details matter.

[–]Chipit[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (12 children)

Genetics plays no role in determining one's likelihood of being a Jerry Springer fan

It's entertainment beloved by people of low intelligence. Springer shows that there are even worse people out there than they are. This makes them feel good, because their own lives are so low-status and it's nice to look down on someone for a change, seeing that the rest of the world looks down on them. Don't you look down in low intelligence people? It's something very common among a certain segment of high intelligence people. If you don't...why not? Low intelligence people cause most of the problems in the world. Trump, Brexit, populism, the list goes on.

Atlantic readers are of high intelligence. Nobody but high intelligence people would find their content stimulating. Low and medium intelligence people regard reading The Atlantic as worse than having to write a book report.

Did you know you could do very well by moving to a country full of low intelligence people? You can easily fool them, hoodwink them, cheat them, and make a ton of money doing so. You would also get to look down on pretty much everyone in society.

[–]whereswhat 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

Replace "intelligence" with "education" and you might be on to something.

[–]Chipit[S] 8 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

Low intelligence people find school - and learning in general - tiring and they don't like it. That's sort of the hallmark of low intelligence, the inability or disinclination to learn. High intelligence people love learning. That's why they read The Atlantic, there's always something to learn in it.

You can't put low intelligence people into Harvard and turn out Atlantic readers.

It's funny how all anyone has to do is mention "West Virginia" and suddenly the hereditary nature of intelligence suddenly comes back. "You cousin-fucking scum suckers have been stupid for five generations!" LOL

[–]bobbobbybob 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

already established and referenced that education can't shift IQ by much.

[–]H3v8 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (12 children)

Dogs are living creatures with many similarities to man. And if you have ever been in a group of people attending the same class, then you know that statistically some are just not capable to learn anything even if they try.

[–]whereswhat 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

Dogs are living creatures with many similarities to man.

Yep.

statistically some are just not capable to learn anything even if they try.

Nope. Nearly all concepts taught in classroom settings can be understood by nearly every human (barring those with severe genetic abnormalities). Statistics tells us nothing about what the human mind is capable of. Most humans will never reach anywhere close to their full potential in the classroom because of a combination of many factors related to nurture (e.g. poor motivating incentives, poor instruction, distracting problems at home, etc.).

[–]Zahn 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

The article stated that up to 80% of intelligence is inherited. The nurture theory is old news, and you're clinging to an increasingly antiquated idea, grandpa. You can provide someone as much environmental education as possible and they will still never be a Mozart. You must not have much real life experience, or you would know that you cannot educate someone to be a genius.

The identical twins study:

https://www.verywellmind.com/what-factors-determine-intelligence-2795285

*Tips Fedora

[–]whereswhat 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

When did I claim you could educate someone to reach the IQ level of genius?

There are geniuses of all races. What do you make of that?

[–]Zahn 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Yes there are geniuses of all races. In Nigeria, there is about 1 genius per 400 people, in Scotland there is about 1 genius per 40 people.

[–]bobbobbybob 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

hah. that's the tail on the not-normal curve coming into play

[–]whereswhat 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Still waiting on the source for those numbers.

[–]whereswhat 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Where are you getting those numbers from? Having a hard time finding any data on the genius rate in Scotland or Nigeria.

I don't deny average IQ is much lower in some countries than others. That is not a valid indication that genes associated with race are also associated with intelligence though.

[–]Zahn 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

I don't deny average IQ is much lower in some countries than others

It's like you're choosing to ignore an important detail. Those countries are comprised of particular ethnic groups/races.

[–]whereswhat 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Yeah, some countries are also much hotter than others. Some don't have safe drinking water. Some are plagued by malaria. The only way to expose a causal relationship between race and intelligence is to understand it on a genetic level. We have not identified such a relationship to date.

None of the studies used here, conclude that the intelligence quotient is influenced by a particular race. In some cases, differences within population groups were found (e.g. in Basil: Blacks 71, Mulatto 81, Whites 95, Japaneses 99), but all differences could be attributed to their origin, level of education or other factors.

In 2006 Donald Templera and Hiroko Arikawab found a connection between increasing skin pigmentation and a decreasing IQ. Even this was not racially dued, because the pigmentation grade is climatically conditioned. The observations were also made within the same groups of other races, e.g. caucasians.

Criticism: The IQ was developed by West Europeans for West Europeans according to West European standards. It is still debatable whether this procedure can be applied to people(s) with entirely different social structures, cultures, values and ways of thinking.

https://www.worlddata.info/iq-by-country.php

[–]Zahn 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

(These) studies are not entirely uncontroversial as they're often considering only specific population groups or only a few individuals per countries.

I'm not so much into the racial aspect of hereditary intelligence, but as said before, it's inevitable. For the most part then it's true that people from Singapore have a greater predisposition to higher intelligence and people from New Guinea have a lower one. Everyone else is in between these two extremes.

I accept that real equality is not natural or genuinely even possible. That I am smarter than some people and some people are smarter than me. I'm not offended by this. It's a beautiful revelation for a world view, that different approaches can be created around how various people perceive reality and require different methods of learning.

Instead we think everyones the same and will have the same outcomes. That we can solve everything wrong with people of all backgrounds by forcing and repeating the mantra of education/environment as if it's some social snake oil. That theory is clearly not working.

[–][deleted] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That's only because of the WORLD-ENDING level of dumbing down in classes over the past 80 years.

Take a good part of the population and teach them latin. See how far you go.

Oh and Latin used to be the very BASIS of any decent education.

[–]bobbobbybob 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

you have no real life experience, and it shows.

[–]Chipit[S] 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

Eye color is a heritable trait. Hair color is a heritable trait. Is intelligence a heritable trait?

[–]whereswhat 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I'm sorry, can you define intelligence?

[–]AFutureConcern 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

It doesn't actually matter, the exact definition. The point is to pick a definition and stick with it, so that we can discover things about it. The psychometric variable underpinning IQ tests is general intelligence, or "g". But it doesn't matter if it's not quite right or exact. I can see where you're going. Intelligence is not well-defined => it can't be said to be heritable or genetic => all groups are just as naturally smart as each other.

The reason you do this is because you see that IQ differences caused by genetics help to "uphold" a "narrative" that "oppresses" groups who have low IQ. Of course, it does do exactly that, because it's true, but people being naturally less intelligent, whilst called "oppression" by Critical Social Justice activists, is totally justified because it is meritocratic. If intelligence were so well-defined and its genetic component so obvious that it was impossible to deny, Critical Social Justice would simply focus on dismantling the moral axiom that "truly meritocratic systems are justified".

[–]whereswhat 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

It doesn't actually matter, the exact definition.

I disagree. You can pick a definition, study trends associated, then change the definition and the same trends will change. I promise.

The reason you do this is because you see that IQ differences caused by genetics help to "uphold" a "narrative" that "oppresses" groups who have low IQ.

Not really. I agree that genetics affects IQ. Are you aware of any study that shows race is a good proxy for IQ though? The genetic differences that lead to the expression of traits associated with different races are poorly correlated with IQ, if at all, from what I understand.

[–]bobbobbybob 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

i promise

you don't have the authority to make that claim

actual t.neuroscientist