Category: Human Behavior and Cognitive Science

Consensus is +/-70% genetics, and +/-30% idiosncratic development. Near zero environment. Most non genetic variance dissipates over time such that in adulthood we are almost entirely gene expression. Or in simple terms you can’t improve on genes, but you can impair a child especially with trauma. And life eventually expresses genetics.

This isnt a holy grail study. Its just the most recent contributing, and I used the title to trigger folks like you while at the same time explaining the reasons for human variation in the text. Thats how I research bias and deceit: running tests.

As we see in the stats of the tweet (esp given my usual stats), it worked.

“Does race influence intelligence?” is a dim question. Race like all accurate stereotypes (and stereotypes are the most accurate measure in social science) is an accurate contributor to the probability you as an observer will encounter a certain intelligence range when you meet someone of that race. But the distribution of intelligence in the races is, as stated, an artifiact of isolation, neotenic selection and evolution, local suppression of reproduction of those less fit for the local environment, and one’s genetic history (which as recombinant computation) is vastly more complex than we had originally anticipated prior to the human genome project.

Reply addressees: @cbaformymain @TheBoomBaby

Consensus is +/-70% genetics, and +/-30% idiosncratic development. Near zero environment. Most non genetic variance dissipates over time such that in adulthood we are almost entirely gene expression. Or in simple terms you can’t improve on genes, but you can impair a child especially with trauma. And life eventually expresses genetics.

This isnt a holy grail study. Its just the most recent contributing, and I used the title to trigger folks like you while at the same time explaining the reasons for human variation in the text. Thats how I research bias and deceit: running tests.

As we see in the stats of the tweet (esp given my usual stats), it worked.

“Does race influence intelligence?” is a dim question. Race like all accurate stereotypes (and stereotypes are the most accurate measure in social science) is an accurate contributor to the probability you as an observer will encounter a certain intelligence range when you meet someone of that race. But the distribution of intelligence in the races is, as stated, an artifiact of isolation, neotenic selection and evolution, local suppression of reproduction of those less fit for the local environment, and one’s genetic history (which as recombinant computation) is vastly more complex than we had originally anticipated prior to the human genome project.