Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why The Pentagon run the best schools and the safest nuclear program

governance.fyi

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 102 posts

Re: Why The Pentagon run the best schools and the safest nuclear program

#51

Post by whimsicalism »

zevon wrote: post #35
Dylan16807 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you're seriously arguing this, you're very close to flirting with eugenics and the like. Please don't be so eager to reject eugenics that you end up being anti-science. The idea that some percent of intelligence is genetic is entirely reasonable, not something to refuse to consider. And there's good evidence too: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritability_of_IQ

I did not say nor mean to imply that genetics do not have anything to do with IQ or intelligence. Also, context matters - this is a thread about how to structure educational environments and about certain specifics of the military. Genetics are a factor that is going to be of limited practical use in this domain, at least as far as I can fantasize OTOH.

seems like a disbelief in heritable intelligence (absurd) is drawing some to use the US military as a shining star of schooling innovation without strong evidence. so seems clearly relevant and useful in this domain to identify which interventions actually work and which are just composition fx

Re: Why The Pentagon run the best schools and the safest nuclear program

#52

Post by whimsicalism »

zevon wrote: post #37
Dylan16807 wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I did not say nor mean to imply that genetics do not have anything to do with IQ or intelligence. Please explain what "Correlations between socioeconomic status and success of one's offspring in educational systems don't mean that intelligence is inherited in the genetic sense." means because it sure looks like an argument that the genetic component isn't real. Especially because you posted that in response to some…

Maybe what I actually meant to express becomes more clear if I re-phrase and expand the the sentence a bit: Correlations between socioeconomic status and success of one's offspring in educational systems does not mean that you can determine genetics as a relevant factor when thinking about how to structure education and if one is interested in the relationship between success (on whatever metric) in education and fam…

> Although IQ differences between individuals have been shown to have a hereditary component, it does not follow that disparities in IQ between groups have a genetic basis.

This is just about race & IQ and already cedes the genetic argument that you were refusing to believe - because the evidence is so overwhelming.

> Contrary to popular belief, two parents of higher IQ will not necessarily produce offspring of equal or higher intelligence.

Not necessarily is load-bearing here in an extremely misleading way. Two parents of higher IQ are much more likely to produce an offspring of higher IQ than median.

You’re basically just cherrypicking arguments that support your incorrect supposition when compared to a mountain of evidence on the other side.

Nobody here brought up race but you/wikipedia.

Re: Why The Pentagon run the best schools and the safest nuclear program

#53

Post by moi2388 »

rickydroll wrote: post #48
moi2388 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, my country has public schools, but children are segregated by educational prowess. The smartest kids go to schools which are completely separate from the less intelligent ones. If you fail, you might get sent to a lower school system. So this would explain why these disruptions would not appear in my country (or to a far lower degree)but would in the US school system.

How would your country school system deal with kids like me, ADHD with spots of brilliance and spots of, "how do you remember to breathe?"

There is special guidance, so usually you can just do the level you “ought” to be in.

If it’s really severe there is special education as a last resort.

More commonly modified lesson plans, or teachers will be instructed to let you out of the classroom for a bit, or give you tasks like “fetch this item from the front desk” in between.

It’s certainly not perfect, but there is quite some guidance and individual measures possible.

Re: Why The Pentagon run the best schools and the safest nuclear program

#54

Post by zevon »

whimsicalism wrote: post #52
zevon wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe what I actually meant to express becomes more clear if I re-phrase and expand the the sentence a bit: Correlations between socioeconomic status and success of one's offspring in educational systems does not mean that you can determine genetics as a relevant factor when thinking about how to structure education and if one is interested in the relationship between success (on whatever metric) in education and fam…

> Although IQ differences between individuals have been shown to have a hereditary component, it does not follow that disparities in IQ between groups have a genetic basis. This is just about race & IQ and already cedes the genetic argument that you were refusing to believe - because the evidence is so overwhelming. > Contrary to popular belief, two parents of higher IQ will not necessarily produce offspring of equal…

Why do you insist on saying that I "don't believe" in genetic components when I've literally said the opposite? The people who wrote the stuff on the Wikipedia site I was provided with and their (researcher-)sources seem to try to tell you and me both "hey, this is an interesting field of study but it's very complicated, many genes are involved, we are far from understanding them or being able to model them, be very careful with interpreting correlations and for (m)any practical purposes (such as thinking about how to structure educational environments), you really should consider quite a lot of things not directly related to genetics." What's so controversial about that and what overwhelming evidence does that go against?

edit: Sorry, to clarify, you are saying that "Two parents of higher IQ are much more likely to produce an offspring of higher IQ than median" because of genetics as the main determining factor?

Re: Why The Pentagon run the best schools and the safest nuclear program

#55

Post by whimsicalism »

zevon wrote: post #54
whimsicalism wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Although IQ differences between individuals have been shown to have a hereditary component, it does not follow that disparities in IQ between groups have a genetic basis. This is just about race & IQ and already cedes the genetic argument that you were refusing to believe - because the evidence is so overwhelming. > Contrary to popular belief, two parents of higher IQ will not necessarily produce offspring of equal…

Why do you insist on saying that I "don't believe" in genetic components when I've literally said the opposite? The people who wrote the stuff on the Wikipedia site I was provided with and their (researcher-)sources seem to try to tell you and me both "hey, this is an interesting field of study but it's very complicated, many genes are involved, we are far from understanding them or being able to model them, be very…

you’re not arguing in good faith and now you’re motte-baileying. you said:

> Correlations between socioeconomic status and success of one's offspring in educational systems don't mean that intelligence is inherited in the genetic sense. If you're seriously arguing this, you're very close to flirting with eugenics and the like.

the obvious reading is that you do not believe in a genetic component to intelligence - and in fact say that a belief in “this” is arguing for eugenics.

> Sorry, to clarify, you are saying that "Two parents of higher IQ are much more likely to produce an offspring of higher IQ than median" because of genetics as the main determining factor?

Even if you remove all environmental factors, two smart parents are more likely to have a smart kid than the counterfactual.

Re: Why The Pentagon run the best schools and the safest nuclear program

#56

Post by nitwit005 »

thaumasiotes wrote: post #38
nitwit005 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They gave up on the traditional IQ test questions for the most part. The ASVAB (Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery) is mostly a knowledge test now. You can find sample questions online. There is still a section on spatial reasoning, which is trying to get at a general mental ability.

You qualify based on the AFQT, which is a composite of four ASVAB subtests. Specifically, the Word Knowledge, Paragraph Comprehension, Arithmetic Reasoning, and Mathematics Knowledge subtests. Sample questions: (identify the best synonym for the underlined word) His record provides no reason for _apprehension_. [ ] anxiety [ ] change [ ] enjoyment [ ] endorsement According to the passage, some artists work with titan…

You'll notice, that is basically your ability to read and do math, which is rather different than the content of a typical IQ test.

People have apparently done research on adding more IQ test sections in: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S22113...

Re: Why The Pentagon run the best schools and the safest nuclear program

#57

Post by zevon »

whimsicalism wrote: post #55
zevon wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you insist on saying that I "don't believe" in genetic components when I've literally said the opposite? The people who wrote the stuff on the Wikipedia site I was provided with and their (researcher-)sources seem to try to tell you and me both "hey, this is an interesting field of study but it's very complicated, many genes are involved, we are far from understanding them or being able to model them, be very…

you’re not arguing in good faith and now you’re motte-baileying. you said: > Correlations between socioeconomic status and success of one's offspring in educational systems don't mean that intelligence is inherited in the genetic sense. If you're seriously arguing this, you're very close to flirting with eugenics and the like. the obvious reading is that you do not believe in a genetic component to intelligence - and…

My original answer was a condensed and far from comprehensive one-sentence reply to another condensed one-sentence-reply (that included the phrase "highly heritable" which is how the whole genetics argument started). Why is what you apparently perceive this original one-liner to mean so important to you? I've expanded on the points I was trying to make quite a bit. And again: The researchers who look at those things seem to be the ones telling us that the relationship between intelligence and genetics is complicated and many, many non-genetic factors are in play, no? Did I miss some big new movement on deterministic genetics in education or some such since I've sat my basic biology, psychology and sociology courses? Do you know stuff that's not on Wikipedia? Help me out here, please - and I'd politely ask you to refrain from insulting my good faith.

I'd also be - again, genuinely - interested in how you come up with that clear of a statement about smart parents and their non-externally-influenced child, how one would approach that as a research question/design and how - practically - useful this piece of data in and of itself would be when most of us are not Kaspar Hauser or any other conceptual model of a human being that exists without external interdependences.

Re: Why The Pentagon run the best schools and the safest nuclear program

#58

Post by IAmBroom »

egl2020 wrote: post #8

For K-12, it's not complicated: every student and parent knows that a student f-up will have consequences for the service member.

Good thing all "military brats" are 100% on-board with helping their parent's career goals. /s

Re: Why The Pentagon run the best schools and the safest nuclear program

#59

Post by Gud »

whimsicalism wrote: post #50
Waterluvian wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not sure this “thinking” on public education holds up if you look outside the U.S. where countries with emphasis on public education so consistently outperform the Americans. I guess at best it might be that there’s problems unique to American culture that makes public education not work. But that feels unlikely to hold up. I think the premise is simply wrong.

the “problem” unique to America is that we like to take in the poor and huddled masses (who don’t test well), while the EU likes to watch them sink and die in the Mediterranean.

This is objectively not true.

If anything, the opposite is true. Europe receives less educated individuals who will be a burden on their welfare, while the USA has cheap labor from South America and attract top talent globally.

Re: Why The Pentagon run the best schools and the safest nuclear program

#60

Post by Retric »

almostgotcaught wrote: post #47
Retric wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> excluding people affected by a brutal but eventually ending war. You just excluded people from these comparisons based on some goal.

If a concept has been made as simple as possible and it's still not simple enough for you to understand, then I'm sorry but I think this conversation is not for you.

Simplicity isn’t the issue here, your lack of argument is.
Post reply on HN