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

Re: Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters?

#501

Post by cloudfifty » Tue, Sep 07, 2021, 1:18 PM UTC

dash2 wrote: post #392

blast wrote: post #293

Chomsky wrote the definitive progressive answer to all this 50 years ago: https://libcom.org/files/chomsky%20-%20iq%20building%20block... Still timely and fresh, especially considering that he was critiquing Herrnstein 20 years before The Bell Curve. Because he's smart and unafraid, either of science or the truth, Chomsky never denies the possibility of a genetic component to IQ, even IQ/race. What he denies are the…

Chomsky's basic argument is that we can build a society where social success doesn't depend on IQ. Or as he puts it: "If... society can be organized more or less in accordance with the "socialist dictum," then nothing is left of Herrnstein's argument" So, if you think socialism works, then yeah, you'll find this very persuasive. From my POV, though, it's a deluded fantasy which 100 years of disastrous policy catastro…

> it's a deluded fantasy which 100 years of disastrous policy catastrophes have disproved

It's disrespectful to throw Chomsky in together with something that he's spent his entire life to very prolifically oppose, namely authoritarianism.

Re: Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters?

#502

Post by concordDance » Tue, Sep 07, 2021, 1:20 PM UTC

Cocojumbo wrote: post #389

tomhoward wrote: post #351

My own experience suggests that whilst yes, genetics is an important factor in life outcomes, other things that are hugely important also aren't adequately researched, because genetic determinism is so widely accepted. I've been experimenting with some self-improvement techniques for nearly 10 years. I found them after a few years of personal crisis and a quest for understanding, as I was very confused at what was ca…

> My own experience suggests that whilst yes, genetics is an important factor in life outcomes, other things that are hugely important also aren't adequately researched, because genetic determinism is so widely accepted. This. IQ !== Success. I used to go to college with two very bright people. I couldn't catch up with them. Because one of them was ridiculousely intelligent and the other was up there close. 20 years…

> For me it's persistence/perseverence

Which is also horribly unfair, as that's done almost entirely to upbringing, genes, sleep and food. Only the last two can be changed by the individual.

Re: Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters?

#503

Post by concordDance » Tue, Sep 07, 2021, 1:23 PM UTC

jmull wrote: post #452

ComodoHacker wrote: post #384

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did liberalism ever promise the equality of outcomes, besides the equality of opportunities?

I’m not sure what anyone was promised, but just from a basic logical perspective, if opportunities are really equal then, over time, outcomes will equalize as well. I’m not a progressive, but if over decades of pursuing liberal policies outcomes are not equalizing, it seems to make sense to try to figure out why and find something better to try.

I think liberalism cares about liberty not equality.

Pure equality is not possible while people have parents.

Re: Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters?

#504

Post by detaro » Tue, Sep 07, 2021, 1:25 PM UTC

mensetmanusman wrote: post #498

Progressives know genetics matter, e.g. there are essentially zero people with downs in Denmark because laws stipulate that you must genetically test the unborn. Those few that make it through this eugenics program are the result of false negatives.

Denmark doesn't have a testing requirement, nor are people only born with downs if a test failed. (It does have very high testing rates and corresponding high rate of subsequent abortions though)

Re: Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters?

#505

Post by swebs » Tue, Sep 07, 2021, 1:27 PM UTC

tomp wrote: post #438

blast wrote: post #293

Chomsky wrote the definitive progressive answer to all this 50 years ago: https://libcom.org/files/chomsky%20-%20iq%20building%20block... Still timely and fresh, especially considering that he was critiquing Herrnstein 20 years before The Bell Curve. Because he's smart and unafraid, either of science or the truth, Chomsky never denies the possibility of a genetic component to IQ, even IQ/race. What he denies are the…

The research definitely is significant - definitely politically, if not scientifically (which I'd argue it is, any research that helps find the truth / predict the future / create a better model of the world is scientifically significant ). We're currently in the middle of several highly emotional political debates, which would easily be resolved by having better/more scientific data, particularly into the correlatio…

>which would easily be resolved by having better/more scientific data

There's already quite a lot of data on the subject. Here's a 30 year meta-study from 2005 for example.

https://www1.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/30years/Rushton-Jense...

The problem described in the article is that people are preventing/defunding further studies.

Re: Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters?

#506

Post by myWindoonn » Tue, Sep 07, 2021, 1:28 PM UTC

concordDance wrote: post #317

myWindoonn wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hello, fellow mathematician. The first step in your proof which doesn't convince me is the claim that, in general, "levels of intelligence" exist, admit a partial order, and can reliably predict whether certain people can learn certain topics. In general, you'll find that "leftists" believe that psychometrics is bogus in terms of science. Instead, it masquerades as science in order to fool the public into believing t…

"Leftists" don't think the correlations between results in IQ tests and many other things (such as memory, income and reflexes) exist?

Correlation doesn't always imply causation, right? For example, there's a correlation between IQ and income. There are several causative possibilities:

* IQ causes income

* Income causes IQ

* Some unknown thing causes both income and IQ

* The correlation is spurious; IQ and income are unrelated

Evidence strongly suggests that the third bullet point is true; socioeconomic class causes both income and IQ. Richer people living in nicer neighborhoods both have better opportunities for income, and also better opportunities for education; education causes IQ. This is why redlining is brought up so often as a root cause of so many of the disparities in quality of life; redlining deepened socioeconomic divides.

Re: Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters?

#507

Post by stringsy » Tue, Sep 07, 2021, 1:32 PM UTC

blast wrote: post #293

Chomsky wrote the definitive progressive answer to all this 50 years ago: https://libcom.org/files/chomsky%20-%20iq%20building%20block... Still timely and fresh, especially considering that he was critiquing Herrnstein 20 years before The Bell Curve. Because he's smart and unafraid, either of science or the truth, Chomsky never denies the possibility of a genetic component to IQ, even IQ/race. What he denies are the…

Thanks for that article - that was a brilliant read. But I don't think Chomsky would necessarily be against Harden's research/aims/motives?

She seems quite aligned with Chomsky on that front actually.

From the OP's article, she seems to be very aware that her research is reflective of current society and should be used to better/change it.

Chomsky mentions that such research could be useful e.g. for improving education - Harden seems to agree there.

"In 2018, she wrote an Op-Ed in the Times, arguing that progressives should embrace the potential of genetics to inform education policy."

So yeh, I don't think they are necessarily talking at cross purposes (despite the 40+ year time delay :P).

(First HN comment, be cool to hear back what you think!)

Re: Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters?

#508

Post by yadaeno » Tue, Sep 07, 2021, 1:33 PM UTC

strikelaserclaw wrote: post #489

yadaeno wrote: post #461

IQ is misunderstood by most people and the common misconceptions are extremely harmful. In reality IQ matters much less than people think. The top 5 rated chess player of all time (Hikaru Nakamura) has a ~105 IQ. People with an average IQ are capable of performing at the 0.1% level with the proper structured training and time. In my experience IQ mostly impacts the rate at which you learn things. So it took you 2 yea…

more like iq is a crude measure of human intelligence

And intelligence is no more than a crude guideline for determining human potential.

The fixation on intelligence is a reflection of a culture that don't recognize hard work and is ultimately lazy. We don't want to put in the grueling effort it takes to master, and hone a craft over decades. We would rather cash in on "genetic lottery" points for the rest of our lives.

You see people bragging about their university or SAT score from 30 years ago, but have accomplished nothing since then.

I have no moral objection with studying IQ among individuals and groups. But I think compared to other factors that influence human potential, it is the least interesting and least actionable. It also perpetuates the myth that it really matters on an indivual level.

Re: Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters?

#509

Post by narrator » Tue, Sep 07, 2021, 1:34 PM UTC

blast wrote: post #293

Chomsky wrote the definitive progressive answer to all this 50 years ago: https://libcom.org/files/chomsky%20-%20iq%20building%20block... Still timely and fresh, especially considering that he was critiquing Herrnstein 20 years before The Bell Curve. Because he's smart and unafraid, either of science or the truth, Chomsky never denies the possibility of a genetic component to IQ, even IQ/race. What he denies are the…

I suspect the leadership of the leftists in America know that there are race IQ differences, but they use this to set up a loop to gain more power.

How do you increase your authority if you know that races are not all of equal ability?

1. Lie and publicly express that you think all races are of equal ability at all things.

2. Widely report that some races don't do as well as others on standardized tests, etc.

3. Blame racists, or even a whole race that does better as the cause of this.

4. Demand that racists must be rooted out and further and further scrutinized for microagreassions, etc.

5. Demand more unconstrained power, money and authority to 'fix' this.

6. Go back to step 1 and continue the loop till you have absolute power.

Re: Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters?

#510

Post by syops » Tue, Sep 07, 2021, 1:50 PM UTC

NoImmatureAdHom wrote: post #138

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…

As a scientist who thinks professionally about things like culture, behavioral genetics, and psychology, I can say: the idea that there /would not be/ humans who cannot learn calculus is the one that is hard to believe.

Thanks for your comment. My statement has unleashed passions in some. It’s been interesting reading the comments.