Once a racist,always a racist

[vooke]

• Tweet

https://nyti.ms/2H6d1XO

But I wonder whether the world is prepared to accept a contrary position if found true, that it if intelligence is powered by genes

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

Of course intelligence is powered by genes.  Intelligent parents are more likely to have intelligent offspring.  But the IQ fanatics are not saying that.  They are saying IQ measures that innate intelligence.  That is just not true.

[RV Pundit]

Until they isolate the intelligence genes - we may never know if there is a racial or regional component to it. IQ is the best we got now - until the next watson figure this out. I mean you should be able to submit your dna - and they should mail you back - saying you're most likely 90% intelligent or something like that -without you having to take a test.

Of course intelligence is powered by genes.  Intelligent parents are more likely to have intelligent offspring.  But the IQ fanatics are not saying that.  They are saying IQ measures that innate intelligence.  That is just not true.

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

Until they isolate the intelligence genes - we may never know if there is a racial or regional component to it. IQ is the best we got now - until the next watson figure this out. I mean you should be able to submit your dna - and they should mail you back - saying you're most likely 90% intelligent or something like that -without you having to take a test.

Of course intelligence is powered by genes.  Intelligent parents are more likely to have intelligent offspring.  But the IQ fanatics are not saying that.  They are saying IQ measures that innate intelligence.  That is just not true.

The thing with an IQ test is that it is not neutral.  You cannot give a Bushman Raven Matrix tests and compare the result to a high schooler in the west.  Bushmen spend entire lifetimes without manipulating little symbols.  It's a chore even convincing him of the need to abstract stuff.  He deals with the concrete world.  So the guy wouldn't even know what you are trying to accomplish or why he has to test his intelligence. 

In any case, one can practice and improve on those tests.  You ultimately end up with a test that tests how good one is at taking it.

http://sciencenetlinks.com/science-news/science-updates/changing-iq/

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

Here is a study that shows that so-called IQ tests are really just a reflection of the amount of schooling one goes through.

Chapter 5

https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.com/&httpsredir=1&article=1016&context=anth_etds

[RV Pundit]

That may be true - but I think IQ still has some value - and is probably the best we've got now. Again until we identify how to biologically measure such a complex phenomenon as intelligence...maybe through DNA or somehow measuring brain activity - we have to use some form of standardized tests - for IQ, for schoools, for jobs - to determine who is intelligent.

[Dear Mami]

That may be true - but I think IQ still has some value - and is probably the best we've got now. Again until we identify how to biologically measure such a complex phenomenon as intelligence...maybe through DNA or somehow measuring brain activity - we have to use some form of standardized tests - for IQ, for schoools, for jobs - to determine who is intelligent.

No, Pundit, I disagree with you. We don't have to have a measure for intelligence when we can't define or measure intelligence: that's unscientific.

I don't think the suggestion is to drop IQ altogether (I'm not sure what, but I'm willing to grant that it may have some uses I can't think of. Schools/jobs etc each have their own way of picking those who are 'competent'). Rather it's that we should not pretend IQ is something it is not.

If you could design an IQ test based on the cognitive skills of the bushman, most of us in the 'modern' world would do dismally. IQ as it is, can't cross cultural boundaries. I'm sure kids in Northern Kenya, Coast, and even Rural Kenya in general, would do really badly on an IQ test compared to kids in Nairobi, Kisumu and Nakuru. We can't look at that and assume that we are innately more intelligent than Northern Kenyans based on such a test. And we shouldn't pretend that that is what those results imply. That is, I think, the point being made.

At best, IQ is a measure of how well-adapted someone is to modernity. And even that is still leaving out other influencers like the trait conscientiousness in the Big 5/OCEAN. The two combined can predict success to a certain level (not absolutely). But this is success in a very particular environment.

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

That may be true - but I think IQ still has some value - and is probably the best we've got now. Again until we identify how to biologically measure such a complex phenomenon as intelligence...maybe through DNA or somehow measuring brain activity - we have to use some form of standardized tests - for IQ, for schoools, for jobs - to determine who is intelligent.

No, Pundit, I disagree with you. We don't have to have a measure for intelligence when we can't define or measure intelligence: that's unscientific.

I don't think the suggestion is to drop IQ altogether (I'm not sure what, but I'm willing to grant that it may have some uses I can't think of. Schools/jobs etc each have their own way of picking those who are 'competent'). Rather it's that we should not pretend IQ is something it is not.

If you could design an IQ test based on the cognitive skills of the bushman, most of us in the 'modern' world would do dismally. IQ as it is, can't cross cultural boundaries. I'm sure kids in Northern Kenya, Coast, and even Rural Kenya in general, would do really badly on an IQ test compared to kids in Nairobi, Kisumu and Nakuru. We can't look at that and assume that we are innately more intelligent than Northern Kenyans based on such a test. And we shouldn't pretend that that is what those results imply. That is, I think, the point being made.

At best, IQ is a measure of how well-adapted someone is to modernity. And even that is still leaving out other influencers like the trait conscientiousness in the Big 5/OCEAN. The two combined can predict success to a certain level (not absolutely). But this is success in a very particular environment.

If I recall the gist, the IQ test was devised to identify learning disabilities.  It was predictive in that arena; and even then in certain environments.  So a bazungu with an IQ of lower seventies tends to be really mentally challenged even in person; a mouth breather literally.  But a Bushman with an IQ of upper 60s seems like a perfectly normal person, even brilliant, when you meet him; someone you have no doubt has no learning disabilities if exposed to it.  That alone should tell you it is not measuring what we normally assume to be intelligence.

[Dear Mami]

If I recall the gist, the IQ test was devised to identify learning disabilities. It was predictive in that arena; and even then in certain environments.  So a bazungu with an IQ of lower seventies tends to be really mentally challenged even in person; a mouth breather literally.  But a Bushman with an IQ of upper 60s seems like a perfectly normal person, even brilliant, when you meet him; someone you have no doubt has no learning disabilities if exposed to it.  That alone should tell you it is not measuring what we normally assume to be intelligence.

Yes, that might be a good use of IQ: identifying those who have learning disabilities in the modern education system.

[RV Pundit]

Test ought to be standardized to eliminate cultural bias.It could mean having different tests for different cultures.