Source citation needed for claims about liberals. Makes sense to me as the macro is based upon the micro and some win big in the gene pool lottery. Source citation needed for the above bolded claim.
Okay, they're certainly wrong. The fact that monkeys and humans have different IQs deflates that argument with absolutely zero effort. I do believe that culture account for the vast majority of disparities between populations of humans, but genetics definitely plays a role.
No, because it's not true. One only needs to glance at the relevant data to understand that this isn't the case. Again, Africans from Africa, Africans from middle class America. Huge disparity. Why? Pretty easy to figure out. One of the stupid-ass articles you linked earlier destroys itself, pointing out the disparity between Jews and "whites." Ashkenazi Jews have the highest IQs as a general population in the world. Genetically, they're ****ing Rhinelander Germans.
https://books.google.com/books?id=K...ved=0ahUKEwjn_P3F7ITUAhUGOSYKHRicCy4Q6AEIRDAE http://scienceblogs.com/webeasties/2013/05/21/science-racism-and-political-correctness/ https://www.google.com/search?clien...litical+correctness+inhibits+genetic+research
I'm sure that's a big part of it, too. A child with highly intelligent parents who are somewhat absent has a good chance of being intelligent. A child with parents who aren't very bright but care about education also has a good chance of being intelligent. But a child with highly intelligent parents who care about education is almost guaranteed to be intelligent.
Not only play a part, play the dominant part in the disparity between human populations. Now I do agree with the general idea that the left is dangerously unwilling to consider the possibility that there are disparities with genetic causes. I'm of the opinion (just a gut feeling) that if there is a genetic disparity between populations, it's miniscule. And I mean miniscule. Further, the more important variables are so unaccounted for that it's foolish to even guess which way that disparity might swing. As much as it might bother the racists at Breitbart it's just as likely that black Africans are genetically more intelligent than genetic Europeans as the other way around.
I don't think you're looking at this from the right angle. I don't believe hereditary intelligence can be attributed across races, but it can within races. For example, my high school graduating class was 100% white. No blacks, no Hispanics. Within my class, high IQ parents were likely to have high IQ children and low IQ parents were likely to have low IQ children. Race was irrelevant. That variation would occur within each race.
Please quote from the source where it makes the claim that "It is a 'theory' amongst most liberals that culture and environment shape intelligence...a few will admit that heredity plays a role." And which one of the Google search results make the claim that "It is a 'theory' amongst most liberals that culture and environment shape intelligence...a few will admit that heredity plays a role." Please pose the link and a quote from the link that supports the above claim.
Well I'm saying "disparity between populations" for a reason. Make no mistake, the OP's purpose here is not a scientific curiosity in the roots of intelligence, it's a political purpose in proving that races have significant disparities in general intelligence.
WORLD RANKING OF COUNTRIES BY THEIR AVERAGE I.Q. https://iq-research.info/en/page/average-iq-by-country
30 years of research on race differences and cognitive ability https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwj4o4LY84TUAhUE1CYKHVLFD8cQFggpMAA&url=https://www1.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/30years/Rushton-Jensen30years.pdf&usg=AFQjCNErXuVhviT5l4dQn2fGsTxVeqyLzw
Let's just look at this page here. How big is the genetic difference between Croatia and Austria? Between a Haitan and African-American?
'Fewer ideas have been more toxic or harmful than the idea of the biological reality of race, and with it the idea that humans of different races are biologically different from one another. For this understandable reason, the idea has been banished from polite academic conversation. Arguing that race is more than just a social construct can get a scholar run out of town, or at least off campus, on a rail. Human evolution, the consensus view insists, ended in prehistory. Inconveniently, as Nicholas Wade argues in A Troublesome Inheritance, the consensus view cannot be right. And in fact, we know that populations have changed in the past few thousand years—to be lactose tolerant, for example, and to survive at high altitudes. Race is not a bright-line distinction; by definition it means that the more human populations are kept apart, the more they evolve their own distinct traits under the selective pressure known as Darwinian evolution. For many thousands of years, most human populations stayed where they were and grew distinct, not just in outward appearance but in deeper senses as well. Wade, the longtime journalist covering genetic advances for The New York Times, draws widely on the work of scientists who have made crucial breakthroughs in establishing the reality of recent human evolution. The most provocative claims in this book involve the genetic basis of human social habits. What we might call middle-class social traits—thrift, docility, nonviolence—have been slowly but surely inculcated genetically within agrarian societies, Wade argues. These “values” obviously had a strong cultural component, but Wade points to evidence that agrarian societies evolved away from hunter-gatherer societies in some crucial respects. Also controversial are his findings regarding the genetic basis of traits we associate with intelligence, such as literacy and numeracy, in certain ethnic populations, including the Chinese and Ashkenazi Jews. Wade believes deeply in the fundamental equality of all human peoples. He also believes that science is best served by pursuing the truth without fear, and if his mission to arrive at a coherent summa of what the new genetic science does and does not tell us about race and human history leads straight into a minefield, then so be it. This will not be the last word on the subject, but it will begin a powerful and overdue conversation' http://www.nationalreview.com/article/382160/genetic-science-vs-belief-michael-barone https://www.amren.com/news/2014/10/a-troublesome-inheritance-a-conversation-with-nicholas-wade/
That's pretty disgusting for a so-called "science" magazine to get Papal and ban science. Truth is what it is, whether it's Historical Truth, Scientific Truth or Personal Truth. Those who cannot handle Truth should just do the honorable thing and off themselves
What "same environment" would that be? Identical family emphasis on education and respect? Prove your claim.
Yes. It's cultural. That approach to child-rearing is common in many cultures (and different races). Like I said, ask them. Go to Harvard and ask all those A students if they had 'slacker' parents, or 'hard driving' parents. Meantime, the proof of this claim is in the very well understood fact that regardless of race, 99.9% of kids in Gifted Education programs have one thing in common: PARENTS WHO TAKE EDUCATION SERIOUSLY.
But why would they do that?....most likely because they are intelligent which indicates they passed their intelligence genes on to their children. Next?
Racial differences in intelligence, personality and behavior http://www.npiamerica.org/research/...nces-in-intelligence-personality-and-behavior
Nature or nurture? The only thing I'm sure of when it comes to intelligence is that my boss doesn't have any.
I could see the left calling for mandatory miscegenation to even out intelligence levels of the races.
Intelligence is indeed genes, however your genes can be influenced by your environment, it's called epigenetics, the modification of gene expression rather than alteration of the genetic code itself. Hormones can cause epigenetic changes by activating/de-activating genes through the process of DNA methylation. For example scientists already know our brains work better at stable blood glucose, the reason for this is the affect of excess insulin on the brain, too much sugar makes you dumb. Obviously other hormones also have an effect on our brain and body... ie. stress hormones can cause epigenetic changes. https://www.nih.gov/news-events/nih-research-matters/stress-hormone-causes-epigenetic-changes
Yes,the leftist out. Yet Head Start is a near total waste of effort and every leftist insists on funding this multi billion dollar waste. The more IQ is proven to be genetic, the less the left can claim dominion over failed social experiment s.
