391–400 of 535 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This take is bafflingly unscientific. You are spewing pure unadulterated ideology here - a particularly ugly one too.
Yes, behavioral genetics is the climate science of the left. If there are PhDs and university departments studying it, I'm not gonna be someone who sticks there head in the sand for the sake of their flavor of political identity.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It could be that height says nothing about competence as a CEO, or it could be that the people who attain CEO and succeed despite height bias need to have an exceptionally strong mix of merit/will/effort. I've heard the latter theory at least a couple times about US Navy SEALs. The first time, it was a retired SEAL I knew (well over 6', and a brick wall) who one day out of the blue said something like, "You shouldn't…
As famously quoted by Darth Vader: https://youtu.be/6A0rwG39Jzkt=349 I've heard a number of times that you want to be worried about the guy who looks out of place because he's there through pure grit, skill, and determination.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The actual problem is that we are not blank slates, and wealthy parents tend to be wealthy because they are more intelligent, and likewise give birth to predisposed-to-be-intelligent babies. I always find it slightly ironic how mother nature gets so much reverence from ostensibly communal types, despite her being the most shamelessly power hungry entity ever conceived.
> wealthy parents tend to be wealthy because they are more intelligent Not "more intelligent", just "unusual in some way". People can be wealthier than average for all sorts of reasons unrelated to intelligence (as defined by IQ). Here's a sampling of them: Being social and good at sales. Most successful real estate agents I've met don't strike me as particularly brilliant. Working a boring job, living modestly, and…
Being good at selling to people absolutely requires intelligence. So do many entertainment fields, and athletic achievement more than you might expect.
Investing consistently in an index fund over 20 years requires a bit of intelligence and a lot of grit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes. Have you tried to find out why making certain pieces of scientific knowledge taboo has had very bad consequences in the past?
Well I happen to have a phd in that broader domain. It's not censorship, as you imply, but IQ is just way fuzzier a concept than people outside of this area of research think. The popular view is IQ is an objective thing, exactly measurable and so on (the metaphor of brains being computers, essentially). In reality you can put a 14 year old from a bad environment into an optimal environment and their IQ increases by…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
merit doesn't mean equal wealth spending to obtain a result. And it's not black and white. Someone rich spending a lot of money to obtain tutoring doesn't necessarily make their score higher, and there's also diminishing returns. Someone poor who do not afford private tutoring can also receive good score due to their natural talent and/or hard work in self-teaching/practicing. > universal SAT tutoring available to ev…
Someone rich spending a lot of money to obtain tutoring will make their score higher if they have any kind of aptitude. Likewise if they have easy access to books, extra study resources, a quiet space for study, no family distractions or challenges, and so on. Poor people typically have none of those extra resources. Some poor people with extreme talent will be able to overcome the challenges of relative poverty, but…
It’s unfair. But nonetheless true that students who were better able to prepare due to superior resources are nonetheless better prepared.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Someone rich spending a lot of money to obtain tutoring will make their score higher if they have any kind of aptitude. Likewise if they have easy access to books, extra study resources, a quiet space for study, no family distractions or challenges, and so on. Poor people typically have none of those extra resources. Some poor people with extreme talent will be able to overcome the challenges of relative poverty, but…
So wouldn't it then be fairest to punish kids with high income or high wealth parents? Say set median household income. If parents make double this the score is automatically halved. If they make half it is doubled. Same on gross wealth. More wealth there is bigger the cut. This would mean that says Musk's kids would need to get sufficiently higher scores than children of someone with no wealth.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In an astrophysics class I had in college , the professor called on a student to solve a problem, he got it wrong, and the professor said "if you would come to my office hours you would know how to solve this" - the students response was something along the lines of "sorry, my parents are crackheads so I need to work two jobs to pay for school"
With all empathy that sucks and is not fair - but should office hours be removed because one student could not attend? Many of the professors I have worked with that I respect have different methods for helping these students- for example sending them an email after class, offering explicit direct help & advice. Or connecting them with a better job, or a research position.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
merit doesn't mean equal wealth spending to obtain a result. And it's not black and white. Someone rich spending a lot of money to obtain tutoring doesn't necessarily make their score higher, and there's also diminishing returns. Someone poor who do not afford private tutoring can also receive good score due to their natural talent and/or hard work in self-teaching/practicing. > universal SAT tutoring available to ev…
> Someone rich spending a lot of money to obtain tutoring doesn't necessarily make their score higher, and there's also diminishing returns. Someone poor who do not afford private tutoring can also receive good score due to their natural talent and/or hard work in self-teaching/practicing. If these are outliers it isn't really meritocratic. If there 100 desired spots that are allocated by the exam, and 1000 students,…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Among all the other reasons that people have explained that this isn’t exactly correct a probably isn’t entirely attributed to just weight… I’ll make an opposite proposition. Perhaps we are evolutionarily programmed to avoid people with impulse control issues?
We are evolutionarily programmed to like attractive people, which excludes most visibly overweight people.
The HN submission title (EDIT: The title is “ Attractive students no longer receive better results as classes moved online ” as I write this, in case it gets updated) isn’t from the paper and isn’t entirely accurate. The paper actually found that male students who scored higher in the beauty ratings continued to get higher grades as well: > On the contrary, for male students, there was still a significant beauty prem…
