Total Posts:18|Showing Posts:1-18
Jump to topic:

Poverty causes IQ to be lower

vbaculum
Posts: 1,274
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/30/2013 6:24:45 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
and dicision making to be worse

"With the sugarcane farmers, we are comparing the same person when he has less money to when he has more money. We're finding that when he has more money he is more intelligent, as defined by IQ tests," said Dr Mani."

http://www.bbc.co.uk...

I just thought this was useful information for those who think about intelligence and/or the impoverished.
"If you claim to value nonviolence and you consume animal products, you need to rethink your position on nonviolence." - Gary Francione

THE WORLD IS VEGAN! If you want it
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/30/2013 6:46:10 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
This should be a stickler for those that say that IQ is genetic. I'm of the opinion that anybody, with a few obvious exceptions, can reach "very smart" levels of IQ with the proper environment and schooling.

Genetics superficially appears to play a role because those with more money generally have higher IQs and their children will consequently also have higher IQs- this is, however, not because of genetics, but because of the environment that the parents can provide.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
Disquisition
Posts: 391
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/30/2013 8:26:14 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/30/2013 6:46:10 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
This should be a stickler for those that say that IQ is genetic. I'm of the opinion that anybody, with a few obvious exceptions, can reach "very smart" levels of IQ with the proper environment and schooling.

Genetics superficially appears to play a role because those with more money generally have higher IQs and their children will consequently also have higher IQs- this is, however, not because of genetics, but because of the environment that the parents can provide.

Good job, your using a sociological imagination.
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/30/2013 9:44:00 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/30/2013 8:26:14 PM, Disquisition wrote:
At 8/30/2013 6:46:10 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
This should be a stickler for those that say that IQ is genetic. I'm of the opinion that anybody, with a few obvious exceptions, can reach "very smart" levels of IQ with the proper environment and schooling.

Genetics superficially appears to play a role because those with more money generally have higher IQs and their children will consequently also have higher IQs- this is, however, not because of genetics, but because of the environment that the parents can provide.

Good job, your using a sociological imagination.

I never said that social sciences were useless or that they are obsolete. I merely stated that they aren't real "sciences."
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/30/2013 10:37:10 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
People become what you make of them. To be honest, I think the control a person has over their body's formation borders on the magical.
vbaculum
Posts: 1,274
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/31/2013 1:08:45 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/30/2013 10:34:03 PM, YYW wrote:
post hoc ergo propter hoc

The study was explicitly designed to rule that out.
"If you claim to value nonviolence and you consume animal products, you need to rethink your position on nonviolence." - Gary Francione

THE WORLD IS VEGAN! If you want it
bossyburrito
Posts: 14,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/31/2013 8:09:22 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Can you link directly to the study?
#UnbanTheMadman

"Some will sell their dreams for small desires
Or lose the race to rats
Get caught in ticking traps
And start to dream of somewhere
To relax their restless flight
Somewhere out of a memory of lighted streets on quiet nights..."

~ Rush
YYW
Posts: 36,296
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/31/2013 8:25:14 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/31/2013 1:08:45 AM, vbaculum wrote:
At 8/30/2013 10:34:03 PM, YYW wrote:
post hoc ergo propter hoc

The study was explicitly designed to rule that out.

With very little success...
Tsar of DDO
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/31/2013 9:01:49 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/30/2013 6:46:10 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
This should be a stickler for those that say that IQ is genetic. I'm of the opinion that anybody, with a few obvious exceptions, can reach "very smart" levels of IQ with the proper environment and schooling.

Genetics superficially appears to play a role because those with more money generally have higher IQs and their children will consequently also have higher IQs- this is, however, not because of genetics, but because of the environment that the parents can provide.

Are you familiar with the Minnesota Twin Family Study?
ClassicRobert
Posts: 2,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/31/2013 4:09:48 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/30/2013 10:34:03 PM, YYW wrote:
post hoc ergo propter hoc

Exactly what I was thinking.
Debate me: Economic decision theory should be adjusted to include higher-order preferences for non-normative purposes http://www.debate.org...

Do you really believe that? Or not? If you believe it, you should man up and defend it in a debate. -RoyLatham

My Pet Fish is such a Douche- NiamC

It's an app to meet friends and stuff, sort of like an adult club penguin- Thett3, describing Tinder
Jack212
Posts: 572
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/31/2013 8:49:58 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/30/2013 6:46:10 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
This should be a stickler for those that say that IQ is genetic. I'm of the opinion that anybody, with a few obvious exceptions, can reach "very smart" levels of IQ with the proper environment and schooling.

Genetics superficially appears to play a role because those with more money generally have higher IQs and their children will consequently also have higher IQs- this is, however, not because of genetics, but because of the environment that the parents can provide.

Genes always play a role in human traits. The question is how much of the variation observed is caused by having different genes. For IQ, that number is very low. Not zero, but very low. You'd have to raise everybody in identical conditions to observe the genetic effects.
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/31/2013 9:31:50 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
The Fool:, it's not causation. it's correlation, and common sense correlation at that.
it's not having less money, that causes IQ differences. Having less money doesn't cause anything. Its conceptual difference not an causal difference.

.and it's a no-brainer that a malnourished brain would affect someone's performance on IQ test.
For even summer time is correlated with lower IQ, most likely due to do students being out practice in relation to a study session.

IQ is a number on a test, thus intelligence quotient. it's not a property of somebody. That is, it's possible to score poorly on IQ test and still become an Einstein. I wouldn't put my money on it, but it's very possible.

The score on an IQ test is standardized in relation to the performance of students in college the previous generation, so is never necessarily represents the population actually writing the test. College is not necessarily the same as an actual practice of something, and it's only extreme differences that really stand out, or should be considered significant.
Like at the bottom 15% or the top 15% the rest is overlapping an ambiguous.

There are many savants, that would score poorly on an IQ test, and yet be a genius in mathematics, or music or in some other ability.

Social science, and psychometrics are pretty sketchy. Most of the information, inferences and conclusions are derived from pen and paper, in form of multiple-choice, short answer questions or questionnaires. Which are just not good enough technology to make the claims that are actually being made..

The problem is that what can be measured more "practically", gets more valued and replaces what it "claims"and is supposed to "Actually" be measuring, which is people intelligence. IQ tests in the last 30 years, for good or for worse, have been heavily manipulated in a way as to not show any differences between social groups, and this is also at the cost of measuring intelligence that has any practical significance.
If there is a significant difference between groups the APA will and has, in the past hired Task Squads, that is, "Goons" in the proper sense of the term, to intentionally smear results in the public eye, To remain consistent with the ideology. What's the point of a science which hides, refuses to publish, or disallows studies from being done to keep in correspondence with unscientific principles.
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
Noumena
Posts: 6,047
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/31/2013 9:43:29 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/30/2013 8:26:14 PM, Disquisition wrote:
At 8/30/2013 6:46:10 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
This should be a stickler for those that say that IQ is genetic. I'm of the opinion that anybody, with a few obvious exceptions, can reach "very smart" levels of IQ with the proper environment and schooling.

Genetics superficially appears to play a role because those with more money generally have higher IQs and their children will consequently also have higher IQs- this is, however, not because of genetics, but because of the environment that the parents can provide.

Good job, your using a sociological imagination.

Can you never use that phrase again? Kthx.
: At 5/13/2014 7:05:20 PM, Crescendo wrote:
: The difference is that the gay movement is currently pushing their will on Churches, as shown in the link to gay marriage in Denmark. Meanwhile, the Inquisition ended several centuries ago.
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/1/2013 10:10:59 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
IMHO this is common sense. If you're mired in poverty, you're more than likely malnourished. If you're malnourished, then your mind will be slow. Take an IQ test, and you will score lower.

I question what an IQ test is supposed to measure exactly, anyway. Is it essentially measuring "neural metabolism"?
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
Dragonfang
Posts: 1,122
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/1/2013 5:33:56 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
This really comes as no suprise to me, the whole IQ thing is subjective anyway. Common sense, civilizations with prosperity tend to have more advancement.
IMO, effort is more important than natural talent since it is needed for potential to be reached.
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/1/2013 8:48:06 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
The Fool: It's common sense that genetics and practice will both play important roles, the question is "what genetics," of the genetics. And there is good reason to believe that people who have money, are "on average" likely to have genetic advantages.

For example; somebody may be genetically tall, and thus have a good body for basketball, and with practice will have a better chance to be a better player, then somebody who short with the same amount of skill and/or practice. And there is no reason why this would be different intelligent.

However,intelligence is more complex with regards to what genes and what combination/configuration of those genes actually affect intelligence is another topic altogether.

The smallest change in configuration of genes can change everything.
An overt example is that two ugly people may have a good-looking child.

On the other hand, there is definitely differences among groups on IQ scores, no question about it, and what is sold to the public as closing gaps, is mostly due to the manipulation of what counts on a test in a way which will not show a significant difference..(mind you, the term significant difference is used quite arbitrarily)

Points for particular skills which have in the past shown a significant difference between race or sex, (or rather have given higher scores to white males) have gotten and/or get reduced in worth in relation overall test score, and points for skills where there isn't' or has not been a significant difference get a higher rating thus drowning out discrimination. I myself, don't think this is not a big deal, but it is another thing when ideologists use this as positive evidence, to support their beliefs. An example is this study "right here" which is trying to use evidence that does not support its claim as a persuasive leverage despite it being false. They will not commit themselves to use the term "cause" but rather passive terminology that will give the reader the "impression" that it is in fact is a "cause", for the purpose persuasion. And obviously it worked..

As sufficient, and honest argument against group intelligence differences is that the scores are all overlapping. That is, the differences with in a group, are much larger than any differences between groups. While the differences between groups are on average in relation to the group but not the individual. There are many people in any group that will outperform many people of any other group on any skill.

That is, they are hardly enough to judge any individual by the group when many, and any individual of any group may happen to outscore or outperform any individual of another group.

While does not account for large groups, it is enough of an argument that makes differences between individuals a more powerful measure an accurate measure.
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
Disquisition
Posts: 391
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/1/2013 11:24:47 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/31/2013 9:43:29 PM, Noumena wrote:
At 8/30/2013 8:26:14 PM, Disquisition wrote:
At 8/30/2013 6:46:10 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
This should be a stickler for those that say that IQ is genetic. I'm of the opinion that anybody, with a few obvious exceptions, can reach "very smart" levels of IQ with the proper environment and schooling.

Genetics superficially appears to play a role because those with more money generally have higher IQs and their children will consequently also have higher IQs- this is, however, not because of genetics, but because of the environment that the parents can provide.

Good job, your using a sociological imagination.

Can you never use that phrase again? Kthx.

Why?