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

Re: Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters?

#711

Post by throwawaylinux » Wed, Sep 08, 2021, 8:24 AM UTC

pasabagi wrote: post #708

throwawaylinux wrote: post #704

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There has been an extremely long and celebrated history of different nations and peoples employing different military tactics and being known for different sets of skills in battle. But aside from that, it seems like everything you wrote is pure conjecture and even if some of it was true, that absolutely does not prove a point about there being no genetic component to intellectual diversity.

Sure - the basic concept of a multi-ethnic social organization presupposes that ethnicity doesn't affect how you react on social conditions. In the 19th century and early 20th century, it became fashionable to say that only nations of one ethnicity could ever function. There are, however, many centuries of empires functioning with a myriad of ethnic and cultural groups living under the same law and administrative str…

Again I don't see how that follows and you can state it with such certainty. Have you got evidence for your assertions?

Re: Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters?

#712

Post by spiralx » Wed, Sep 08, 2021, 8:29 AM UTC

inglor_cz wrote: post #697

spiralx wrote: post #685

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is it genetics? Is it gut microbiota? (E.g. genetics of other species?) If you don't control for portion size comparing people who all have a burger and fries for dinner every night is basically useless, those meals could be hugely different in composition, portion size or how much is left over. Even if dinners are identical, snacking can be thousands of calories a day that you might never see happening. You've als…

Portion size is notoriously hard to control for in freely moving people. If people self-report their foods, they are likely to make mistakes. I know of one study only where the numbers can be trusted, and it was done on prisoners, where every single gram of food that passed their lips was accounted for. They were fed the same diets, but their weight gains varied a lot: https://dm5migu4zj3pb.cloudfront.net/manuscripts…

The only place you can see weight gains is by looking at Table I and working it out yourself for each subject, and only the last subject PW had an outlying weight gain in absolute terms but his starting weight was also an outlier - his relative gain was the same as all the others as well.

The paper is about how the weight of fat cells changed at different subject weights, not how much subject weight changed for a fixed food size - the only mention of food portions is with respect to ensuring weight was maintained, gained and lost for the different stages. "After desired or maximum obtainable weight was reached" indicates they weren't using weight as the outcome here.

The only place you can see the weight gains is by looking at Table I and working it out yourself for each subject, and the relative gains are all very similar: 23.3%, 25.3%, 21.4%, 20.0% and 18.0%. I'm guessing they wanted them to put on 20-25% of their body weight to give consistent and measurable changes to the fat cells.

Re: Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters?

#713

Post by pasabagi » Wed, Sep 08, 2021, 9:48 AM UTC

throwawaylinux wrote: post #711

pasabagi wrote: post #708

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure - the basic concept of a multi-ethnic social organization presupposes that ethnicity doesn't affect how you react on social conditions. In the 19th century and early 20th century, it became fashionable to say that only nations of one ethnicity could ever function. There are, however, many centuries of empires functioning with a myriad of ethnic and cultural groups living under the same law and administrative str…

Again I don't see how that follows and you can state it with such certainty. Have you got evidence for your assertions?

P 1. A policy is a set of procedures a state employs to get a desired reaction from a population.

P 2. An empire is a state that employs some policies across its entire territory.

P 3. Multi-ethnic empires with strong cohesion have existed.

So if you take 1, and 3, you see that for both to be true, people have to have very standardized reactions to policies across ethnic 'lines'. I state it with certainty because it's obvious.

Re: Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters?

#714

Post by throwawaylinux » Wed, Sep 08, 2021, 10:49 AM UTC

pasabagi wrote: post #713

throwawaylinux wrote: post #711

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again I don't see how that follows and you can state it with such certainty. Have you got evidence for your assertions?

P 1. A policy is a set of procedures a state employs to get a desired reaction from a population. P 2. An empire is a state that employs some policies across its entire territory. P 3. Multi-ethnic empires with strong cohesion have existed. So if you take 1, and 3, you see that for both to be true, people have to have very standardized reactions to policies across ethnic 'lines'. I state it with certainty because it'…

Doesn't follow. Why do they "have to"?

Counter-example: people within a single ethnicity have a huge range of reactions to policies (based on all sorts of things, whether or not genetic).

Re: Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters?

#715

Post by Kbelicius » Wed, Sep 08, 2021, 11:07 AM UTC

visarga wrote: post #655

Kbelicius wrote: post #437

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> value creation is rewarded with nothing but "respect" and "intrinsic satisfaction". That is not a stance Chomsky holds nor the vast majority of socialist. How have you become so anti-socialist without even knowing what socialism is?

Socialism is a system where a clique of powerful people jail and abuse anyone who opposes their ways. Ostensibly it's for the good of society, but in reality it's just for the ruling class. Source: lived under socialism for 14 years. Also observe N.K. Come to think of it, it's a woke utopia. Enforced equality, anti-meritocracy and cancellings making everyone live under constant fear.

Meh, none of that is socialism. Those things also happen in capitalist societies so I guess we could also say that those things are capitalism... it seems that to you there is no distinction between capitalism and socialism.

Also, your source is bad. It is like saying that you read something in a book... Which book?

Re: Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters?

#716

Post by raducu » Wed, Sep 08, 2021, 11:24 AM UTC

fragmede wrote: post #321

raducu wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do have poor working memory and I did struggle with algebra, especially with copying wrong sign from row to row and things like that. But I did make paper sort of my working memory and when doing algebra I felt that I was just the very resource limited CPU that executed the instructions from paper-memory. Algebra always made me feel like I was doing some mindfull exercise where I had to empty my mind, follow the pa…

Look into ADHD and if you identify with it, you might look into getting a professional's perspective.

I've been recently diagnosed with ADHD.

Re: Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters?

#717

Post by raducu » Wed, Sep 08, 2021, 11:29 AM UTC

spiralx wrote: post #691

raducu wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do have poor working memory and I did struggle with algebra, especially with copying wrong sign from row to row and things like that. But I did make paper sort of my working memory and when doing algebra I felt that I was just the very resource limited CPU that executed the instructions from paper-memory. Algebra always made me feel like I was doing some mindfull exercise where I had to empty my mind, follow the pa…

I read this paragraph in a paper on ADHD and learning disabilities literally after replying to a comment above yours... > There is also evidence of domain-specific cognitive deficits that contribute to specific learning-related disabilities. For example, phonological processing difficulties have been found in children with poor reading performance, whether or not they also exhibited problems with ADHD symptoms or mat…

I had no problem with reading or abstract thinking or grasping mathematical concepts.

My problem was that oftentimes I would screw up calculations for a math problem and only get 7/10 score on it (the reasoning was mostly right, but the answer was not).

Re: Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters?

#718

Post by pcrh » Wed, Sep 08, 2021, 12:00 PM UTC

xyzzyz wrote: post #204

tgv wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never heard a number as high as 70%. Where does that come from? Otherwise: any idea how intelligence was operationalized? I also think we can only accept that we're born different, but human. If we should aspire to anything, it should be to make life good for every individual, taking their capacities into account, not to give everyone an academic degree.

70% is actually on the low side of today’s results. Observed heritability is lower in early childhood (meaning the amount of variance in intelligence among children explained by genes is “only” 20%-50%, “only” in quotes because it’s still large amount, as far as phenotypical traits are concerned), but grows to 80%+ in adulthood, even higher than that if you correct for attenuation (i.e. measurement error, which will…

It's interesting that you cite that Plomin article, since it actually concludes that only a small proportion of intelligence is genetically inherited. To quote:

>Using years of education rather than intelligence per se, the meta-analysis mentioned earlier with 125 000 individuals in a discovery sample yielded a GPS that accounted for 2 and 3% in two independent samples.16 More variance in intelligence is likely to be explained with GPS derived from larger samples, whole-genome sequencing and more novel strategies such as using networks of functionally linked genes.

Accounting for 2-3% of variance in intelligence through genetics is pretty weak support for genetics being an important contributor to variation in intelligence (however measured).

The denialism here lies with those who wish to believe that intelligence is largely genetically determined, rather than socially and environmentally determined.

Re: Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters?

#719

Post by dash2 » Wed, Sep 08, 2021, 12:49 PM UTC

cloudfifty wrote: post #501

dash2 wrote: post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

He opposes it when it turns up. But for example, he was frightfully keen on Venezuela's "21st century socialism" until it predictably, and predictedly, became yet another authoritarian failure:

https://iea.org.uk/but-that-wasnt-real-socialism-part-3-vene...

Re: Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters?

#720

Post by MichaelZuo » Wed, Sep 08, 2021, 1:23 PM UTC

sudosysgen wrote: post #687

MichaelZuo wrote: post #675

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would you assign 100% of the ‘real political economy’ to capitalism, given the very obvious existence of non-capitalist forces that exist in the ‘real political economy’?

I don't, but it's clear that there were societies where the vast majority of the political power served capital, so from then on you can say that they were unhindered capitalism. Of course, there is always some political power that is not wielded by capitalists, even merely because the state requires a military and capitalism requires the state, but since that is inherent to capitalism it can still be said to be part…

‘ but since that is inherent to capitalism it can still be said to be part of capitalism without any restraint.’

It certainly seems like your assigning 100% of it.