Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

I browsed through it. Is there some point in particular that you wanted me to take note of?

It is interesting analysis overall. Some experts:

Variance explained by genes (both directly and indirectly) grows with age. As more and more of the environment comes under control of the individual the more IQ reflects a person's genetic endowment. As the fraction of variance explained by genes grows with age, the constancy of IQ over time grows—because genetic differences are stable.

Therefore, it may not be a change in the child that increases the constancy of IQ with age, but rather a change in how much control

the child is exercising over his or her environment. The very low correlations between the IQs of very young children and their later

IQs (even after correction for reliability) might be interpreted, within the framework we propose, as evidence that the upper

bound for the direct impact of genetic endowment on IQ is lower still.

Edited by ~Sophia~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I really don't think that I did. I have been accused in this thread, several times, of saying that genes were more or most important in the IQ of an individual.

You did state at one point that: "for the most part, variations in IQ are genetic."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sure, that could happen, but my point is that this modeling career would be much less likely, since she's ugly. To suggest that people tend toward the sorts of activities which they are worst at contradicts most of my experiences.

Ugly is a bit extreme. But maybe her mother was a former model and with the insider knowledge of the industry the girl saw modeling as a real possibility for herself as well (we see that with actors). The source of motivation and what sets a person on a particular path can be environmental.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You did state at one point that: "for the most part, variations in IQ are genetic."

Ok...I call "no fair." That's outta context. :)

On the graph I was describing, there's an assumption of all other things being equal. In which case, nothing else is left. You have to admit, that has not been my central position.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ugly is a bit extreme. But maybe her mother was a former model and with the insider knowledge of the industry the girl saw modeling as a real possibility for herself as well (we see that with actors). The source of motivation and what sets a person on a particular path can be environmental.

The point was that because(in my hypothetical) the poor girl got beat by the genetic ugly stick, so being a model would be very, very difficult. If she was kinda pretty, or a bit pretty, I would have written that into my hypothetical but she wasn't. She was fugly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...