Heritability of IQ/g/intelligence

>No one is going to genocide anyone.
maybe not, thats a worst case scenario. it would still be more than likely used to be generally shitty to another group of people, which as i mentioned goes against the purpose of science.

i don't want be that guy. most other people in STEM don't want to be that guy either. its not like there is billions of dollars in funding at the end of it, and any legitimate research is going to require a team.

can you not look at it from a scientists perspective and see that you have little to gain? pursuing truth is not our jobs, thats religion and philosophy.

Don't you realize that egalitarianism, which is the lie used to suppress these truths, is used to "be shitty" to Asians and whites, who get shafted on campus and in the office so niggers and spics can be made to feel less stupid?

You can't please everyone. Stop trying.

I can be most extremely shitty to people with the use of science.

does anyone else think that Hitler guy was really bad??

I heard he believed stuff like this, like the idea that some people are scientifically better than others.

When people talk about this stuff they go bad, like Hitler !!

Spot on dude.

>muh Hitler

Hitler built roads too so I guess we better stop doing that as well.

>Average IQ is 104

take your complaints up with educators. i'm telling you why the research you want done, isn't being done.

yeah, you can. but most people who get into science don't want to be. its why the DoD has to pay so well.

Your explanation isn't valid because egalitarianism is used to bludgeon high IQ races. If it were valid, egalitarianism wouldn't exist.

The research is being done anyway. It just doesn't get reported on after it gets published.

A janitor cleaned up my ironic post of "playing the idiot" which was meant to draw attention to the historical context driving the political nature of this issue

to explicitly re-frame:

Heritability of IQ supports models of racial hierarchy, hence popular discussion is taboo because the current political climate is vehemently pro-egalitarian. The legacy and philosophy of Hitler provide historical context as a polar opposite to popular modern ideals.

No they to busy building drones and weaponizing lasers. It's not really the educators it's the government.

oh fuck I'm high my post didn't even get deleted

All races were no created equal. You don't need IQ test for that. You can tell by the societies they build.

How could this be used to justify genocide? Not everyone is equal so it is okay to whipe ethnic groups off the map? I don't follow.

What would be the point?

To repeal Affirmative Action.

Because we are living in an era where being racist is the worst thing you could possibly be. the Nazis who murdered something like 30 million people (only 6 million jews, it was 20-40 million in total) did it for racism. You have slavery and segregation, which remind us of the past. All of this culminates to a culture that is super against racism (or at least overt racism, it gets hazy). Now, slavery was often justified by racism wherein the slavery apologist would claim that being black means you hae a lower IQ and are therefore subhuman (which is racist by definition, but yeah, I know the word racist is misused so god damned often that it's infuriating).

Because of this history, making the claim that blacks are inherently less intelligent and it comes from race/genetics will get you blackballed. It is racist, however, that doesn't mean it can't be true. It's basically the uncomfortable idea (possibly reality as more and more studies reach the same conclusion) that black people have the lowest IQs and asians have the highest when things like socioeconomic status are factored out.

That said, I'm not 100% ready to jump aboard this idea (and I won't be ready to do so publicly in this social climate, call me a coward) because I need to see studies indicating that this is true outside of the US because it could be explained by selective breeding during slavery (up until 1860 or so black people in the south were bread like cattle to produce the strongest and dumbest offspring). Interestingly, this could possibly explain why black people dominate sports.

American blacks are actually smarter than full blooded blacks.

Source? I've never seen this, but I haven't thoroughly researched the topic, either.

Then again, the slavery breeding -> dumber blacks argument does seem like it wouldn't have as large of an impact on blacks today as it would, say, 1880-1900-born blacks and would likely have dissipated by now.

Also, do you know why US blacks would have higher IQs? Is it maybe because they have interbred with whites/asians more?

>but I haven't thoroughly researched the topic, either.

Then why do you have such strong opinions on the subject, faggot?

The primary reason is white admixture.

>The specific genes don't need to be known for establishing heritability. That's the whole point of heritability.

Very interesting. My entire family is musicians, dating back 4 generations. Thus, musical skill is genetic?

>Go look them up yourself if you want to know the details.

So in other words, I have to substantiate /your/ claim?

I haven't made any claims personally, and the Wikipedia article I posted is full of citations. You don't know what heritability is .

>You don't know what heritability is.

Yes I do. You are the one conflating correlations over multiple generations with heritable genetic traits.

I don't have strong opinions on it. Without any evidence/research I assume that whatever statement is being made is not necessarily correct. I have seen some research that suggests that this conclusion may be true, which is why I'm leaning more towards it being true, but I haven't seen evidence of US blacks being more intelligent than African blacks. For me, the statement isn't true until I have that evidence.

I don't have a strong opinion on it, I'm just a skeptic, which seems appropriate for taking a scientific approach to everything.

>correlations over multiple generations

That's basically what heritability is.

Holy shit faggot, in the time you wrote this shitpost you could have just fucking googled it.

Also, with exposure to elevated lead levels.
motherjones.com/environment/2016/02/lead-exposure-gasoline-crime-increase-children-health

>Entire thread with no talk of genetic engineering

This thread so shit.

>No links to latest research

nature.com/mp/journal/v21/n6/full/mp201645a.html

>That's basically what heritability is.

Perhaps that's what it means to /you/, considering that you have no clue what you're talking about. Shared environmental factors, methods of rearing, and a host of other variables can make it so that multiple generations of a family line share common characteristics. On the same token, none of those factors involve genetics.

Considering that IQ is just an invented way of labeling *'smart people'*, it's something that's even more prone to these kinds of uncontrolled variables. It's not like autism where, even though we don't have a firmly established genetic link, it's something that's known to exist in our biology.

>Considering that IQ is just an invented way of labeling *'smart people'*

Sorry to burst your little perspective, but IQ is a good measurement for one's potential and what you can achieve academically speaking.

You must be one of those faggots, who believe that success is only due to your own hard work, and hard work will always lead to success and so on.

Genetic engineering is happening already with humans in China.

The other countries all have their moral cuffs on.

China is practising eugenics already, which is good and necessary.

Just as it was necessary with follow through their 1-child politics.

just fuck off already steven pinker, IQ is already flawed enough as a psychometric/proxy for g without having to bring genetics into it.

you're putting the cart before the horse. until we can isolate and identify genes and neuronal configurations for intelligence, giving a shit about its heritability makes you a /pol/-tier edgelord at best

asian master race

IQ tests are pretty much the most reliable shit to come out of psychology

lol

>psychology is shit and not a science
>IQ is the only thing reliable in psychology
redbuttondilemma.jpg

Solve an IQ test, get your score, then solve another similar IQ test, and get a bigger score. If that's what you call reliable, then kek.

I'm a sjwtard
I'm glad to hear that you will be breeding with an aborgine while the rest of us will breed to increase the future generations average IQ :^)

> solving tests don't make you smarter
It explains why you're an inept loser lol. Stop crying and attacking peoples rights to care about their IQ just because you don't have any brainlet. Now go make me my burgers if it's not too complicated for you.

>why do so many educated Americans believe in the lie of egalitarianism and the blank slate?

It has nothing to do with race, I'll tell you that much.

Higher dopamine levels are associated with higher IQ, and aggressiveness and impulsiveness at the same time. The TT allele of the DBH gene causes lower levels of norepinephrine, and the AA allele of COMT is called the 'worrier' gene.

The mind produced by the genome can't be judged by a single metric like IQ. There are dumb people, but they're dumb for many reasons besides low IQ. You can be thoughtful and jumpy, thoughtless and jumpy, thoughtful and self-controlled, or thoughtless and self-controlled.

Blacks are women tend to be thoughtless and jumpy, and that's why they perform worse. They could meet the standards, but they can't focus. Amphetamines - which increase dopamine - increase the academic performance of blacks and women.

Society doesn't like how the solution to this problem is eugenics, since we can breed women and blacks which have the right alleles. The public gets scared when you start talking about eliminating normal people from the gene pool like we do with Down syndrome fetuses. Wait till they discover that incest is often the only way of maintaining a genotype - misegenation destroys diversity and good phenotypes. Look up outbreeding depression.

As well, I don't agree with the common vision of human improvement, and would never submit to someone else's eugenics program. Both China and the west want people who can succeed in a cut throat, globalized economy where aesthetics and pleasure don't matter.

I mean, if the west can't even cure depression, despite levodopa and ketamine being readily available, I don't want it screwing with my genes. The cure can be right in front of their faces, and they won't take it because it's "psychotic."

I also want to take human beauty to a post-human level, and this enrages the feminists.

You realize that an actual test takes hours to do and requires a trained psychometrician?

That might just be because height is very straight forward while intelligence is actually complex? And while intelligence is bound to genes, they don't give you the exact number of IQ points you will have for all eternity. IQ isn't solid in the first place. Genes rather give you your intelligence potential and the rest is up to your formative years.

Also regarding pic related. You have white and adopted children who grow up in a white household? Since adoption in their case couldn't have any influences on their intelligence and since the average IQ of whites all around the globe is not even 105 your source can only be wrong.

So we have one race where the climate, flora and fauna is noticeably more hostile and another one where surviving is generally easier and you think it's solely because of genetics?
>inb4 bringing the example of European colonials settling in Africa and creating more than the Africans could
Yes, because in their easier to survive in home world they could build the tools and gather the knowledge to tame a more hostile continent they didn't have to start out in.
Do you even know that societies only develop a culture when getting food isn't a constant concern for them?

as you point out the athleticism analogy usually works and that is a form of un-democracy people get over just fine, considering its extent of above the neck involvement, but demonstrate it about one's (educ)ability to book learn and you basically make equalitarians and their solutions ( mo $ for dem programs) unsellable and those hacks lose their job.

This is the logical conclusion to this line of thought.
If someone is inferior, this inferiority is heritable and we are interested in bettering humanity, the only rational choice is to identify the inferior ones and kill them so they do not pass on their inferiority.

This is one side of the fork that makes faggots a massive social problem as well.

or you go all John Rawls, acknowledge that innate disparity, and have a society IQ-wise to have a places for those with a low aptitude to acquire skills, because all this do-gooderism really hurts and is not sustained change if you are inconsiderate to cognition.

This is potentially worse as the intelligent people are clearly numerically inferior. Riots are a very are possibility in such society.
We've had seemingly untouchable ruling classes get massacred many times over in history.
Why would things change?

And at the end of the day this is similarly cruel as mass executions.
Kindness is not bad.

ps how do you know your methods of measuring intelligence are reliable?

the scientific method?
IQ research is without exaggeration the most empirical thing psychology ever did. unlike almost anything else, its findings can be replicated. You could very well be a tabula rasa-ist but that does not alter evidence.

Is empiricism valid?
If you think so, explain why you believe it is.

also why caricature a caste system, I'm just saying low IQs (as a population) can't into book learning, so it will frustrate and be misfit for them to expend social resources there when skilled labor is something that is better to promote for them. you can be a benign wrongthinker. It already goes on, The SAT is a defacto IQ on the body of student applicants. As some have described before, black and hispanics scores have been given points to the SAT and Asians have had their deducted. If you want to make the cheating chinaman argument, fine but that's still discrimination.

this will be settled only when we discover the concrete IQ loci, the concrete alleles and identify the good ones and the bad ones, what proteins they code and what alleles 'blacks', 'whites' and 'asians' have.

The races are in quotations for a good reason. Take white people for example - eastern european peoples have almost a 10 point lower IQs than westerners. This might indiciate racial stratification OR environment.

Same goes for africans, which are no less diverse than europeans or asians.

Another potential problem for iq race realism is that black americans somehow do worse than african immigrants despite having up to 1/4 whiteness in them.

pic related is a VERY simple genetics problem
II-1 has allergies. The family has a marker locus marked on X chromosomes, question asks what II-1 karyotype is

if you cannot answer this you should really stop talking about genetics

>Why is this shit so controversial?
Collectivism and tribal delusions.
"We're all equal and mostly the same. That's why we need to be tolerant of our differences or something... conform, conform, racist, bigot, racist, bigot, sexist, bigot, conform, conform..."

Feel good nonsense and social pressure spreads ideas like viruses. A lot of it stems from present day sharp contrast in living standard and income between populations (classes), and a lot of history. So the "they're not intrinsically stupid" notion is readily twisted to whatever use a person sees fit. Most everyone wants a world where everyone can do alright enough, and an end to certain types of violence and conflict. Unfortunately this compromises realistic thinking and allows them to be easily controlled through social engineering.

Genetics obviously bias people towards certain behaviors, and a lot of the hardware capability parts of intelligence are genetically potentiated. Etc. Barely worth talking about in the present social climate.

Have you learned nothing from history?

Most people haven't / can't.

IQ is inherently problematic. How do you determine 'intelligence'? Intelligence of what?

How many IQ quizes ask questions such as 'Jane is upset at Bobby, how would you best prevent a confrontation between them?'

And yet we are social creatures who are required to work together in groups. How many 'brilliant' socially awkward people can you name? Why is that a good thing, that we train people for one singular purpose and ignoring all others create people who cannot function together in teams?

We end up with shit like this:
freakonomics.com/2011/06/01/launching-into-unethical-behavior-lessons-from-the-challenger-disaster/

Because we are after one resource from people and damned the rest.

>IQ is inherently problematic.
It might be maladaptive, but I've just come to expand "IQ" to "intelligence and perceived capability" while ignoring any of the other stuff the speaker might have in mind.

IQ as a metric is problematic, but a more mechanistic approach to its underlying elements is not. Intelligence is relative, and overall a spectrum. ie, you cannot be intelligent without something to be intelligent about, a time when you are intelligent, and a capacity (arbitrarily defined by a given window of time) for those aspects of intelligence. I just wish people would abandon IQ, even in the most clinical settings. Focus on evaluating specific subsystems, attempting to extrapolate to the whole is a fruitless waste of time that engages all the worst human stratifications and hierarchical behaviors. Like receiving a phd...

Or you could have sourced your claim.

If you're willing to accept difference in intelligence among dog breeds I don't understand why differences in intelligence among races is out of the question.

because people arent dogs you fuck dont insult my intelligent

Because you're a racist bigot for thinking races exist. Now fall in line, fuckhead, and leave your brain at the door. We'll be doing the braining for you.

But we wuz kangs. You tryna say dat we not as smart when we built dem pyramids?

SHIT DAWG
DEM PYRAMIDS MY NIGGA
FORGOT ALL ABOUT DEM THANGS
WE WUZ KANGS N SHIT DAWG FO REAL
THAT WAS THE REAL SHIT MAN LIKE DAMN NIGGA FOR REAL

Could you believe that there are smaller amounts of genetic difference between breeds of dogs and humans?

damn, do people still believe race is a useful abstraction? it's been proven wrong a long time ago, but you have to be soft on these poor amerifats, they brain is full of propaganda and transfats.
Reread what you wrote, OP.
>The heritability of height is 0.80.
That's why all them niggers are the same height, and all them chinks, and ...
Wait, what the fuck were you saying?
Accept you're just trying to prove you're better because reasons, and that's it.

Sometimes Veeky Forums's internal extensions detect posts as deleted even though they aren't. Usually very quickly after posting. It's weird.

>Ashkenazi master race
FTFY

The development of civilizations is a rather complex thing, affected by elements of domestication of animals, climate, natural resources, etc. It becomes clear that dominant civilizations,throughout history, have been created due to a function of many of these variables.
Refrain from jumping into conclusions about intelligence based on the history of the world. You can't establish a causal relationship so loosely, especially if the situation is a multi- variable one without a control.

>most of the variation is due to genetic differences

Doesn't address the fact that IQ scores go up when test takers are given incentives. Doesn't address the fact that the same person can get a wide range of IQ scores. Doesn't address the fact that the social stigmas that plague people still exist despite white-parents existing.

As a matter of fact, it ignores a massive amount of evidences that suggests that human intelligence is both nature and nurture, as has been the accepted idea in academia and science for literally thousands of fucking years.

>as has been the accepted idea in academia and science for literally thousands of fucking years.
Why did you choose to tack this on. It was just fine without it. Now it's just authority gnob cobbling.

DEM NIGGAS DIDN'T BUILD PYRAMIDS
IT WAS THE EGYPTION WHICH WAZ CLOSER TO ARABIANS YOU FAGGOTZ