Live data from Hacker News

Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters?

newyorker.com

231–240 of 756 posts

Re: Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters?

#231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're making a lot of leaps of logic here, which might be why your colleagues are disagreeing with you. You go from "not everyone can learn algebra or calculus" and "mental disabilities exist" to "therefore intelligence is a scale and controlled by genetics and unalterable," which doesn't really track. Your previous education, your upbringing, your cultural values, these things all also have huge effects on your apt…

I think the more people can learn algebra than OP implies, but as a former math educator my experience also indicates some people are genetically limited in mathematics. For reference, my specialty was working with very remedial students and only ever had a few students not make progress (~2%) but I do think that small percent was genuinely hopeless and I don't say that lightly. I have a pet theory as to why those st…

> To start, I believe that the idea of "working memory" is largely valid. Think of it as the number of distinct ideas you can hold in your head at once, sort of like trying to hold a phone number in your head when you've just heard it for the first time.

Interestingly, testing myself with the Wechsler reverse-digit-span test, I found very large improvements in working memory from taking 20-minute afternoon naps and from modafinil. I'm not claiming everyone is alike, of course, but working memory is definitely not as fixed as height and eye color.

Specifically with regard to mental math, I find I can do a lot more when I'm lying in bed in a dark room than when I'm in an uncomfortable chair in a noisy cafe with people talking to me. Or, for that matter, classroom.

> Many of these students grew up in rich neighborhoods with good parents. They had most advantages you can imagine, seem reasonably intelligent when you talk to them, but Algebra will always be beyond them.

I tried marijuana once and found the opposite effect: when I was high, by the time I got to the end of saying a sentence, I couldn't remember how it had begun. But people report that I seemed like I was conversing normally; if they didn't know me, they wouldn't have realized anything was off. I wonder if these folks were experiencing something similar all their lives?

Re: Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters?

#232

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…

>Intelligence is largely (~70-80% of variance) inherited

Also a scientist here....

Intelligence, however measured, is largely inherited. However, that inheritance is not genetic, but social.

It's now been rigorously demonstrated that common variation in genetics has very little to do with intelligence as generally conceived.

Just for some examples of well-powered studies:

>A genome-wide polygenic score constructed from the GWA results accounted for 1.6% of the variance of intelligence in the normal range in an unselected sample of 3414 individuals, which is comparable to the variance explained by GWA studies of intelligence with substantially larger sample sizes.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29731509

>in 2016, a second meta-analytic GWAS analysis with a sample size of 294,000 identified 74 significant loci. This analysis produced a GPS, EA2, that predicted 3% of the variance in years of education [a proxy for intelligence] on average in independent samples.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5985927/

Re: Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters?

#233
post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the more people can learn algebra than OP implies, but as a former math educator my experience also indicates some people are genetically limited in mathematics. For reference, my specialty was working with very remedial students and only ever had a few students not make progress (~2%) but I do think that small percent was genuinely hopeless and I don't say that lightly. I have a pet theory as to why those st…

HN crowd doesn't think twice about people who try to run DOOM on a stack of pennies, but are ready to give up before trying to get algebra to run on someone with less working memory. It's weird how different the attitude is.

[deleted]

Re: Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters?

#234
I disagree with the premise of the article. It's attacking a straw man. Progressives believe that genetics matter. It's just that they believe other things matter more (such as fairness, equality, etc).

The problem is that these research studies tend to narrowly focus on trying to prove that white people are superior. Why? What is this the only question that interests such supposedly academic individuals? It's because, yes, they are Nazis. They can't figure out any questions worth asking that don't boil down to the same old race baiting.

Re: Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters?

#236
I find myself reading and thinking and quietly ranting about this (and similar) topics often. The reason being that fundamentally I feel we are witnessing an erosion of the acceptance of the scientific method itself.

The scientific method simply put is "Truth has more validity then beliefs". Of course we don't have access to Truth so we use evidence as a proxy to Truth via interpretation.

Obviously interpretations may vary and even contradict, but that's a good thing and discussion should be encouraged, not censored, as we hopefully stirve towards consensus.

In the spirit of this I have no problem with holocaust deniers moon landing truthers etc insofar as the presentation and discussion of evidence is concerned.

I think that there should be strong public unacceptance of any kind of scientific discussions being shot down.

Re: Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters?

#237
post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for asking, I should've explained. The percentage here is percent of variance ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variance ). What it means, basically, is the extent to which you can predict a child's intelligence just knowing the parents' intelligence--not assuming the child was raised by those parents. In your second paragraph, you've actually hit on one of the apologetic clichés that's popular now. People will…

No, from a public policy perspective, the important question is what environment can we create that benefit as many people as possible. The current environment, from prenatal care to availability, cost and quality of higher education is something that is created by public policy. It is certainly not anything given.

> No, from a public policy perspective, the important question is what environment can we create that benefit as many people as possible.

The problem is that since there already is substantial variance in environment that different people experience today, but nevertheless the amount of variance explained by shared environment is very, very low, this means that if we want to increase intelligence using environmental interventions, you can’t designate some environment that some (eg. well off people) already experience, and get everyone into that environment, because it simply won’t work. If it did, it would already show in the amount of variance explained by environment.

Instead, what you need to do is to intervene by putting people in environments very few if any people today experience. This is the only approach that can work, as it can overcome the low amount of variance explained by environment. Suffice to say, nobody yet figured out what those unusual environments actually would be like, as you can’t simply copy whatever well off or genius people grow up like. If you do come up with something, it might end up being a hard sale too, given that this will be necessarily stranger than what people normally expect. But, if it works, you’ll improve the world massively and make history. Chances are against you though, as millions of people in the education industry worldwide have already tried almost anything you could come up with, and nothing really works.

Re: Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters?

#238

In year 2021, I can tell you, not only genetics is taboo, culture is also taboo now. If an academic dares to say that culture matters in student outcomes (learning, discipline), the person can also get canceled.

>In year 2021, I can tell you, not only genetics is taboo, culture is also taboo now. If an academic dares to say that culture matters in student outcomes (learning, discipline), the person can also get canceled.

An example of culture mattering is Britain, where you have three groups from the Indian subcontinent:

* Indian Hindus

* Indian Sikhs

* Indian and Pakistani Muslims

Sikhs and Hindus have been very successful; they are more likely than the average to be part of the British middle class (http://www.theguardian.com/money/2010/dec/14/middle-britain-...>). Muslims are, by contrast, worse than average in every single social measure despite being, racially speaking, indistinguishable from the other two groups to any outsider (since none knows, or cares, about the myriad of caste differences); they are all "Asians" in Britain.

Re: Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters?

#239
post #157

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…

> --Intelligence is largely (~70-80% of variance) inherited Citation needed, especially given that there are enormous differences in intelligence between people who acquired speech and those who didn't.

I hope this need for a citation comes from genuine curiosity and not some misguided ideological want to uphold the notion of equality in intelligence.

It just doesn't make sense given a more macroscopic view of things. If inheritance obviously controls the difference in intelligence between the human brain and the dog brain, or the cat brain, or the monkey brain, what black magic makes it so that among humans themselves inheritance controls very little of intelligence?

The 70% - 80% statistic seems like a ballpark estimate he pulled out of a anecdotal conclusion based off of a broad spectrum knowledge of the related scientific research. You likely aren't going to find a citation that proves this claim definitively. It does not mean that his point is incredulous nor does it mean that his point isn't part of common sense.

His point makes sense. It makes a lot of sense. The same sense as the fact that the covid vaccine protects against the virus even though for the longest time it was NEVER FDA approved (aka no strong citations). The conclusion was obvious despite not meeting the stringent verification of the FDA and many people were able to arrive at this conclusion without the science. Yet many people refused to believe the efficacy of the vaccine due to their political ideology.

I believe there's a similar biased attitude coming from the far left side of thinking. The unwillingness to see that the science and common sense points to an inescapable conclusion. There is no unseen magical force that makes all races, all genders and all peoples equal. There are differences, and the differences are biological and obvious.

Like literally genes control how ugly and how tall you are but not intelligence at all? By some crazy magic intelligence is the one thing that isn't at all influenced that much by genetics? Seriously, which viewpoint is more realistic here?

Seriously the same ultra left people who were calling out the anti-vacc people as stupid and unintelligent for refusing the vaccine are unable to see the exact same kind of ideological stupidity within themselves.

Re: Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters?

#240

Genetics has a huge influence on what someone is predisposed to and what they can achieve. Certain ethnic groups and families, on average, are more likely to have certain traits and less likely to have others. But genetics doesn't matter , in that just because you have "bad" genetics doesn't mean you'll suck, whether it comes to weightlifting, intelligence, temperment, etc. Maybe you won't be in the top 0.0001%, but…

Kenyans, Ethiopians and (white) Americans are not genetically homogenous. Even two siblings can be quite different genetically.

The great American distance runners have genetic talent - they didn’t just train harder than their middle school mates who were out of breath while the champions ran faster and longer than anyone else weeks after beginning training.

Post reply on HN