Print

Print


The point is that there is no evidence that has stood up to any degree 
whatsoever that there are genetic differences more exactly in IQ performance 
but also no evidence whatsoever that there are genetic differences in 
intelligence full stop.

What is going on here is a category error. Perceptions of differences in 
each other's intelligence have been assumed to be genetic that is to say 
intelligence is in the same category as money - some people have more of it 
than others and it is inherited. Actually intelligence as we perceive it is 
in the category of language. Differences  in language are learned not 
genetic. We all have the capacities to learn each other's languages. An 
English infant raised in Shanghai by Chinese adoptive parents will learn to 
speak perfect Mandarin and vice versa for a Chinese infant raised in London.

You can try this experiment for yourselves. When you see someone acting 
intelligently or someone who is more intelligent than you , or less 
intelligent than you ask your selves what you are responding to. You 
certainly are not examining  DNA. Similarly for accents: does  the working 
class accent of a Sommerville teenager tell you anything about his 
intelligence. Ditto for the articulate Harvard undergraduate.  But please 
don't bring in all the tests unless you yourselves have examined them and 
their flaws. The test just tend to conform social prejudice through the 
process of so-called test standardisation where the people who are suppose 
to be intelligent score high through the removal of questions on which they 
do poorly. Ditto for questions that show differences between the experiences 
of men and women - the tests are "standardised so that on average both sexes 
score the same by removing or adding questions until the result come out 
right.

But I stress: think about it.  What are you responding to when you think 
someone is intelligent? What exactly are you responding to?  Try it out with 
a friend. Who are you smarter than? Who is smarter than you? What is really 
going on there? Your assessment clearly is not based on genome sequences. 
That part is just an assumption. Which of course that is what all the 
genetic studies assume. They assume the result they are meant to be proving. 
Mathematicians have long been aware of the hazard of assuming the result you 
are trying to prove. But the Race and IQ ideologues have never got the 
point. It is all just so obvious to them. Proof is irrelevant.