The anti-racist plausibility dilemma

[Loren Pechtel]

The heritability shows there is a genetic effect.

Nonsense.

People have children with higher or lower IQ's than themselves all the time.

If the child has a similar IQ it is because of environmental, not genetic factors.

And no child is a copy of either parent. A child is a mish-mash of random genetic information from both parents.

But when the parents are away from the average the children will tend to also be.

 

[bigfield]

Nonsense.

People have children with higher or lower IQ's than themselves all the time.

If the child has a similar IQ it is because of environmental, not genetic factors.

And no child is a copy of either parent. A child is a mish-mash of random genetic information from both parents.

But when the parents are away from the average the children will tend to also be.

That is not necessarily due to genetics. It may be, but you're jumping to a conclusion. There are other factors that may also create the relationship between a parent's IQ and a child's IQ: Don2 mentioned the gestational environment, where children develop congenital disorders due to factors other than genetic inheritance, eg. epigenetics. That also shows that one cannot equate heritability with genetic heritability.

 

[Malintent]

Intelligence is a measure of "mind function", just as tests of the kidneys are a measure "renal function".
The brain is an organ, much like all the other organs in the body.

Who is arguing that the brain organ is immune to similar genetic influence of every other organ in the body?

Black people get sickle cells with greater frequency than non-blacks... that is a function of an organ.
What organ functions of the brain are immune to this type of racial grouping of alleles, and what is the mechanism that makes the brain unique in that way?

 

[untermensche]

Nonsense.

People have children with higher or lower IQ's than themselves all the time.

If the child has a similar IQ it is because of environmental, not genetic factors.

And no child is a copy of either parent. A child is a mish-mash of random genetic information from both parents.

But when the parents are away from the average the children will tend to also be.

Yes. It is called experience, exposure.

When one is exposed, or not exposed, to the modes of thinking that so-called IQ tests measure at an early age many will acquire them or not acquire them for life.

The key is almost always experience, exposure.

No matter what the genetics if the experience is impoverished, at very early ages, even in the womb, the individual will not acquire many things.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Didn't Hitler claim that Aryans were also superior physically to other races? So what's up with the op only talking about the mind?

 

[untermensche]

Intelligence is a measure of "mind function", just as tests of the kidneys are a measure "renal function".
The brain is an organ, much like all the other organs in the body.

Who is arguing that the brain organ is immune to similar genetic influence of every other organ in the body?

Black people get sickle cells with greater frequency than non-blacks... that is a function of an organ.
What organ functions of the brain are immune to this type of racial grouping of alleles, and what is the mechanism that makes the brain unique in that way?

Intelligence is not a measurement of anything.

It is a capacity.

And no test can measure every aspect.

And so-called IQ tests measure many useless, but testable aspects of intelligence.

What are important are things like emotional maturity and contentment, abilities to get along with people, ability to maintain long term personal relationships. These are what the genetics "crave" if the genetics do anything. Humans are social animals and need to feel part of some social group.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

But when the parents are away from the average the children will tend to also be.

Yes. It is called experience, exposure.

When one is exposed, or not exposed, to the modes of thinking that so-called IQ tests measure at an early age many will acquire them or not acquire them for life.

The key is almost always experience, exposure.

No matter what the genetics if the experience is impoverished, at very early ages, even in the womb, the individual will not acquire many things.

You're forgetting adoption--only pre-natal factors matter in those cases.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

You're forgetting adoption--only pre-natal factors matter in those cases.

Well, no, gestational environment is of course a factor along with genetics but it's not true that ONLY pre-natal factors matter. Where society places you has a lot to do with what you look like regardless of your being adopted and societal expectations play a role in what you become. I will add that people most often know when a person is adopted and often will have expectations based on such knowledge. Until society has absolutely no expectations based on what people look like or their family background, this will remain a factor, however large or small.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You're forgetting adoption--only pre-natal factors matter in those cases.

Well, no, gestational environment is of course a factor along with genetics but it's not true that ONLY pre-natal factors matter. Where society places you has a lot to do with what you look like regardless of your being adopted and societal expectations play a role in what you become. I will add that people most often know when a person is adopted and often will have expectations based on such knowledge. Until society has absolutely no expectations based on what people look like or their family background, this will remain a factor, however large or small.

I'm saying only pre-natal factors could make for a correlation of the intelligence.

Furthermore, I forgot to include that only genetic factors matter in the difference between the relationship between identical and fraternal twins.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Well, no, gestational environment is of course a factor along with genetics but it's not true that ONLY pre-natal factors matter. Where society places you has a lot to do with what you look like regardless of your being adopted and societal expectations play a role in what you become. I will add that people most often know when a person is adopted and often will have expectations based on such knowledge. Until society has absolutely no expectations based on what people look like or their family background, this will remain a factor, however large or small.

I'm saying only pre-natal factors could make for a correlation of the intelligence.

I explained why that isn't true. To elaborate further with an example, it is well known among education professionals that teacher expectations is a significant factor in student success. Such example is even more significant if much of society is doing it.

Furthermore, I forgot to include that only genetic factors matter in the difference between the relationship between identical and fraternal twins.

On first-pass, you might think that, but for each new genotype difference you also have to consider interactivity with other variables (such as environmental conditions). Some of the difference, then, may be accounted for by interactivity not typical intelligence genotypes. So, for example, identical twins may more likely have identical (in)tolerances to external chemicals in comparison to fraternal twins, creating less variance in how external chemicals affect each twin. Such twins may then have more similar health levels at birth which may be correlated to how well children adapt to cultural expectations and how well the brain grows. None of such interactivity logically necessarily implicates intelligence genes since the same genotypes may perform worse with different chemicals or even different levels of the same chemical.

 

[untermensche]

Yes. It is called experience, exposure.

When one is exposed, or not exposed, to the modes of thinking that so-called IQ tests measure at an early age many will acquire them or not acquire them for life.

The key is almost always experience, exposure.

No matter what the genetics if the experience is impoverished, at very early ages, even in the womb, the individual will not acquire many things.

You're forgetting adoption--only pre-natal factors matter in those cases.

And there is evidence that cognitive capacities are developing in the womb.

Newborn infants react differently to their mother's language than they do to a foreign language.

Not their mother's voice, the mother's language.

This demonstrates the early development of the language capacity in the womb.

As I said, environment.

That is the key.

Genetics are not that different in humans and are spread out over all groups.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

On first-pass, you might think that, but for each new genotype difference you also have to consider interactivity with other variables (such as environmental conditions). Some of the difference, then, may be accounted for by interactivity not typical intelligence genotypes. So, for example, identical twins may more likely have identical (in)tolerances to external chemicals in comparison to fraternal twins, creating less variance in how external chemicals affect each twin. Such twins may then have more similar health levels at birth which may be correlated to how well children adapt to cultural expectations and how well the brain grows. None of such interactivity logically necessarily implicates intelligence genes since the same genotypes may perform worse with different chemicals or even different levels of the same chemical.

And how is that not a genetic factor??

- - - Updated - - -

You're forgetting adoption--only pre-natal factors matter in those cases.

And there is evidence that cognitive capacities are developing in the womb.

Newborn infants react differently to their mother's language than they do to a foreign language.

Not their mother's voice, the mother's language.

This demonstrates the early development of the language capacity in the womb.

As I said, environment.

That is the key.

Genetics are not that different in humans and are spread out over all groups.

As I mentioned in another post, when I posted the above I forgot to mention that identical vs fraternal twins show a different degree of heritability of intelligence. How can that be anything other than genetics?

 

[Trausti]

And how is that not a genetic factor??

- - - Updated - - -

You're forgetting adoption--only pre-natal factors matter in those cases.

And there is evidence that cognitive capacities are developing in the womb.

Newborn infants react differently to their mother's language than they do to a foreign language.

Not their mother's voice, the mother's language.

This demonstrates the early development of the language capacity in the womb.

As I said, environment.

That is the key.

Genetics are not that different in humans and are spread out over all groups.

As I mentioned in another post, when I posted the above I forgot to mention that identical vs fraternal twins show a different degree of heritability of intelligence. How can that be anything other than genetics?

If intelligence is not heritable, then evolution and natural selection cannot be true. Every creature would be as smart as an amoeba. Let's do away with Lysenko's ghost.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

And how is that not a genetic factor??

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interaction_(statistics)

 

[Learner]

Intelligence is not a measurement of anything.

It is a capacity.

And no test can measure every aspect.

And so-called IQ tests measure many useless, but testable aspects of intelligence.

What are important are things like emotional maturity and contentment, abilities to get along with people, ability to maintain long term personal relationships. These are what the genetics "crave" if the genetics do anything. Humans are social animals and need to feel part of some social group.

I'm with you with this. The phrase used when "Intelligence is heritable" has a misleading undertone imo, that Intelligence is "already developed" when obviously newborns are born without knowledge or understanding of the world.

In my laymans understanding ; Perhaps these scientist must have mistaken using this concept and using the term "Heritable Intelligence" really to mean genetically by the "speed and capacity of how an individual "learns then recalls". What gets input through all the sensory parts of the human body...dependent upon the environment of the individual. The variables are too great to pinpoint.

 

[untermensche]

If intelligence is not heritable, then evolution and natural selection cannot be true. Every creature would be as smart as an amoeba. Let's do away with Lysenko's ghost.

Intelligence is heritable the way vision is inheritable.

They have done experiments where they have covered the eyes of newborn cats.

If the cat's brain does not get visual stimulation at critical periods the cat will never see, even when the coverings are removed.

The brain goes through a critical stage of development in terms of vision.

The same is true, but more subtle and complicated, with intelligence.

There is a basic intelligence and then there is the intelligence that is either exposed or not exposed to certain modes of thinking at an early age.

Nowhere, except in intelligence, do people think that environment and exposure do not play critical roles in final expression.

 

[Trausti]

If intelligence is not heritable, then evolution and natural selection cannot be true. Every creature would be as smart as an amoeba. Let's do away with Lysenko's ghost.

Intelligence is heritable the way vision is inheritable.

They have done experiments where they have covered the eyes of newborn cats.

If the cat's brain does not get visual stimulation at critical periods the cat will never see, even when the coverings are removed.

The brain goes through a critical stage of development in terms of vision.

The same is true, but more subtle and complicated, with intelligence.

There is a basic intelligence and then there is the intelligence that is either exposed or not exposed to certain modes of thinking at an early age.

Nowhere, except in intelligence, do people think that environment and exposure do not play critical roles in final expression.

Well, yeah. But you're not saying that if a human newborn does not get exposed to certain modes of thinking that that child will have the intelligence of an amoeba, are you?

 

[bigfield]

Intelligence is heritable the way vision is inheritable.

They have done experiments where they have covered the eyes of newborn cats.

If the cat's brain does not get visual stimulation at critical periods the cat will never see, even when the coverings are removed.

The brain goes through a critical stage of development in terms of vision.

The same is true, but more subtle and complicated, with intelligence.

There is a basic intelligence and then there is the intelligence that is either exposed or not exposed to certain modes of thinking at an early age.

Nowhere, except in intelligence, do people think that environment and exposure do not play critical roles in final expression.

Well, yeah. But you're not saying that if a human newborn does not get exposed to certain modes of thinking that that child will have the intelligence of an amoeba, are you?

While human DNA codes for a highly-intelligent brain that is capable of abstract reasoning, logic, symbolic thinking, and complex social and emotional cognition, these faculties only develop to normal, healthy levels if a child achieves a series of neurodevelopmental milestones throughout their formative years.

If a child's environment doesn't provide the necessary stimuli, or provide noxious stimuli, then the child can develop cognitive deficiencies. For example, young children learn number skills such as cardinality, counting order, and abstract numbers. These abilities aren't learned automatically as the brain grows; they emerge while the child performs counting exercises during play and early education. If these opportunities are limited or denied to the child then they will be slow to develop. (The kitten's eyesight is an extreme example of such a phenomenon, but it is the same in principle.)

If the development of fundamental cognitive skills like these are affected by the mental stimulation a child receives then it follows that researchers need to ensure that such variation in environment doesn't confound their analysis.

 

[Trausti]

Well, yeah. But you're not saying that if a human newborn does not get exposed to certain modes of thinking that that child will have the intelligence of an amoeba, are you?

While human DNA codes for a highly-intelligent brain that is capable of abstract reasoning, logic, symbolic thinking, and complex social and emotional cognition, these faculties only develop to normal, healthy levels if a child achieves a series of neurodevelopmental milestones throughout their formative years.

If a child's environment doesn't provide the necessary stimuli, or provide noxious stimuli, then the child can develop cognitive deficiencies. For example, young children learn number skills such as cardinality, counting order, and abstract numbers. These abilities aren't learned automatically as the brain grows; they emerge while the child performs counting exercises during play and early education. If these opportunities are limited or denied to the child then they will be slow to develop. (The kitten's eyesight is an extreme example of such a phenomenon, but it is the same in principle.)

If the development of fundamental cognitive skills like these are affected by the mental stimulation a child receives then it follows that researchers need to ensure that such variation in environment doesn't confound their analysis.

Give the child all the stimuli you want, but the child is as smart as he will be regardless. Plenty of loving parents bring their child to doctors reporting that their bundle of joy is missing milestones despite the constant parental attention. Nature's a bitch.

 

[untermensche]

Intelligence is heritable the way vision is inheritable.

They have done experiments where they have covered the eyes of newborn cats.

If the cat's brain does not get visual stimulation at critical periods the cat will never see, even when the coverings are removed.

The brain goes through a critical stage of development in terms of vision.

The same is true, but more subtle and complicated, with intelligence.

There is a basic intelligence and then there is the intelligence that is either exposed or not exposed to certain modes of thinking at an early age.

Nowhere, except in intelligence, do people think that environment and exposure do not play critical roles in final expression.

Well, yeah. But you're not saying that if a human newborn does not get exposed to certain modes of thinking that that child will have the intelligence of an amoeba, are you?

Of course not. Why even say such gibberish?

But what I said is significant.