Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters? • Hacker News Board

Re: Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters?

#191

Post by AliceWong » Tue, Sep 07, 2021, 6:58 AM UTC

NoImmatureAdHom wrote: post #139

asdff wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think time well spent is a huge factor to anyone success. Most pro athletes, chess champions, musicians, artists, etc, picked up their hobby at a young age in most cases, and just stuck with it until adulthood and enjoyed the compound effects of having a teacher or coach spend time with you multiple times a week for decades. I think you can put anyone in that environment and they would become elite in whatever you…

No, some people are so stupid that they will never be able to do tasks much more complicated than e.g. sweeping the floor. You are trying to conjure a vision of the world that is comfortable to believe, but that vision does not reflect reality.

I'm not sure the assumption that the comment above you is somewhat delusional is not necessarily reasonable here. I do think its that people are interpreting "everyone" differently.

To me, 'everyone' does not mean literally every person but rather the vast majority. Whether this number is 95% or 90% is going to be interpreted differently. I think nearly all of us can agree that as intelligence falls on a bell curve there will always be those unfortunate enough to not be able to do certain tasks. However the nature of the bell curve does mean that around 90% of people are above ~80 IQ.

Re: Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters?

#192

Post by EllieEffingMae » Tue, Sep 07, 2021, 6:59 AM UTC

NoImmatureAdHom wrote: post #177

EllieEffingMae wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regardless of your credentials, as far as I am aware the scientific consensus on this topic is that genetics is nearly impossible to separate from other causal factors. Mainly other causal factors that we have clearer and more direct evidence of having an influence on cognitive ability. So, quite frankly, I don't care if you spend a lot of time thinking about it, it's irrelevant. The consensus is clear.

Yes, exactly like that!

If you would be so kind to explain to me why I should believe you, a random person on the internet claiming to be a "scientist" who "spends a lot of time thinking" about this subject, over thousands of peer reviewed research articles and case studies stating that even if genetics is a factor in intelligence then it is so closely tied to other causal factors that it is effectively impossible to control for, then I am happy to listen.

So please, I am begging you, tell me why I should believe you over everyone else.

Re: Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters?

#193

Post by ZephyrBlu » Tue, Sep 07, 2021, 7:00 AM UTC

mewpmewp2 wrote: post #184

ZephyrBlu wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think at least some of those statements are independent of parenting, access to education and nutrition. Give everyone perfect parenting, a great education and lots of nutritious food and some of them still won't be able to learn calculus.

Give everyone the perfect genes and lack of environment can also cause them not to learn calculus.

You are misunderstanding. Calculus is just a placeholder for something that requires a particular level of intelligence.

It's about whether it's possible or not, not whether you actually do learn the thing.

Someone with an IQ of 120 may not ever learn calculus, but they probably have the ability to do so. You cannot say the same of someone with an IQ of 80.

Re: Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters?

#194

Post by NoImmatureAdHom » Tue, Sep 07, 2021, 7:00 AM UTC

lrem wrote: post #185

NoImmatureAdHom wrote: post #152

In these comments: people doing apologetics for a vision of the world where everyone is born with equal potential. I am a scientist, I work on these things, and I am here to tell you that: --Intelligence is largely (~70-80% of variance) inherited --Your personality is largely determined by genetics and is pretty much settled in to what it will always be by ~30 --If you don't learn to count right by ~4 you never will…

You've made four claims and thus far provided a source for the first one. Any chance for the other four?

It's a very reasonable ask. I'm not on my work computer, and anyway I don't have the classic papers at the tip of my tongue, so I'd have to look them up. So I guess I've got nothing for you but an apology. Perhaps when the sun rises.

Re: Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters?

#195

Post by dlp211 » Tue, Sep 07, 2021, 7:03 AM UTC

ZephyrBlu wrote: post #167

ludston wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does your science control for differences between parenting, access to education and nutrition though? I would expect doing so to be unethical and therefore not allowed.

I think at least some of those statements are independent of parenting, access to education and nutrition. Give everyone perfect parenting, a great education and lots of nutritious food and some of them still won't be able to learn calculus.

But why only calculus? Why the focus on a single subject? This is a very limited view of intelligence.

Re: Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters?

#196

Post by NoImmatureAdHom » Tue, Sep 07, 2021, 7:03 AM UTC

EllieEffingMae wrote: post #192

NoImmatureAdHom wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, exactly like that!

If you would be so kind to explain to me why I should believe you, a random person on the internet claiming to be a "scientist" who "spends a lot of time thinking" about this subject, over thousands of peer reviewed research articles and case studies stating that even if genetics is a factor in intelligence then it is so closely tied to other causal factors that it is effectively impossible to control for, then I am…

That is not, in fact, what "thousands of peer reviewed research articles" state. You might be confusing the % of variance we can predict from genetics (e.g., knowing your ATGCATAGCCGTAG code), which at present is maybe 4%(?), with what we can show is due to heritability (70-80%). We didn't even know about DNA when people started measuring this kind of stuff with twin studies in the early 20th century.

So, to reiterate because I'm realizing that para wasn't so clear: guessing how smart you are based on your genetic code is something we're only just learning how to do. We're getting better at it though. Estimating how smart you are based on how smart your parents are is a totally different game that we've been playing for a century.

Re: Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters?

#197

Post by DangitBobby » Tue, Sep 07, 2021, 7:04 AM UTC

SilverRed wrote: post #127

DangitBobby wrote: post #76

People strongly want to believe that intelligence doesn't have a strong genetic component, I think mainly for moral reasons. If not everyone can be expected to learn and be proficient in everything due to genetics, then suddenly merit itself is also based strongly on luck, and now the belief that people with greater merit should have better lives no longer seems fair. Intelligence is now just another gift to the fort…

Even without genetics this problem still exists. What about the people with parents who push their kids harder? What about the people born in areas with better education? You could push these questions all the way to debating if you ever had any free will to begin with or if your whole life was the result of your environment. And ultimately does it even matter what the answers to these questions are? If rewarding peo…

The problem isn't rewarding people for being smarter, it's predatory practices to take advantage of people who don't know any better, or leaving those who will never be smart enough for a really good job to rot in minimum wage hell.

Re: Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters?

#198

Post by nlitened » Tue, Sep 07, 2021, 7:04 AM UTC

TulliusCicero wrote: post #26

> Given the difficulties of distinguishing between genetic and environmental effects on social outcomes, he wrote, such investigations were at best futile: “There will be no reason to pursue these types of research programs at all, and they can be rendered to the same location as Holocaust denial research.” > Over the next year, a biosciences working group revised the program’s funding guidelines, stipulating in the…

To be fair, I know quite a bit about how social sciences are done, and most of such research is not reproducible. Nine out of ten social scientists know barely enough statistics to p-hack the outcome into what they want to believe in the first place.

I am sure that if first order effects of genes is allowed, you get a never-ending stream of “tall people are diligent”, “blonde people are empathetic” and similar false results that are not only useless, but also might upset general public or sponsors.

Re: Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters?

#199

Post by yawaworht1978 » Tue, Sep 07, 2021, 7:04 AM UTC

lifeisstillgood wrote: post #10

syops wrote: post #2

From the article: Over the next year, a biosciences working group revised the program’s funding guidelines, stipulating in the final draft that it would not support any research into the first-order effects of genes on behavior or social outcomes. The fact that this area is controversial suggests to me that it is worth exploration. I’ve taught mathematics at community colleges for over 20 years and I’m absolutely con…

I like to feel the same way as your colleagues about "everyone can learn to code". I can definitely say that there are many people for whom it is a struggle - even those on college courses. But a hundred years ago we could easily have the same conversation about simply reading and writing - they (the poor, women, or "lower class" ) luke not be taught to read. But it turns out that if you start young enough, and put e…

I started programming with a friend, I remember our first Js and PHP, he got stuck often, stopped for months while I was getting some first contracts, he was in awe about it and I thought he is hopeless, he always kept saying we will make it. He continued to go to local meetings where most people used phyton,c ,anything but what we used. Then I moved away, couple years later, he informed me he is some sort of full stack engineer at IBM, still is. That was a big lesson to never judge one based on early results. This guy didn't understand function arguments and how return works for a long time. I was bad at geometry initially as well, but with the help and encouragement of teachers, i managed to improve beyond class average. Some other topics, there was no help nor will and I stayed well below average. Motivation and dedication and external factors like help can neutralize intelligence adv/disavantages at times, seen it happening over and over.

Re: Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters?

#200

Post by luckylion » Tue, Sep 07, 2021, 7:05 AM UTC

atoav wrote: post #140

As a somewhat progressive from the US-perspective (so: European, living in Germany) I don't recall saying genetics didn't impact things. Genetics is just not a lever I am willing to pull in order to influence things. As some of you might recall, the last time Germany tried just that it went into the direction of ultimate genocidal horror. Also there are much more low hanging fruits with a bigger impact on a societies…

> So cool — genetics matter, just like education, nutrition, social situation, security of ones environment etc — but what do we do with this?

Not claim that everything is due to a secret cabal of structural racism/sexism/hate on the poor? As long as you have that as your perfect explanation for the state of the world, you won't really make a difference, because you're attacking the wrong issue.