|
|
|
|
|
|
by _h4xr
5912 days ago
|
|
|
That is definitely not an answer. Grandparent suggested that genetics plays a role in why people in one country are different from people in another. And you respond by saying that if he says that, he might say something else, which you find even more unacceptable! It should be possible to admit that if 1) you're dealing with a country of genetic relatives, and 2) genetic factors are responsible for 60-80% of the variance in IQ, then Finland's superior education can be explained in part by the fact that it's full of Finns. |
|
|
That is untrue, and is known to be untrue by the leading researchers on human behavioral genetics.
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1177649
The current view by the researchers most familiar with the data is that broad heritability figures report, for a given sample, simply that monozygotic twins tend to be more similar than dizygotic twins, and close relatives tend to be more similar (across a HUGE range of human behavioral traits) than more distant relatives. But the pre-Mendelian methodology of compiling broad heritability figures FAILS as a prediction of how subject one trait or another is to environmental influences. It is well known that some traits with very high heritability (physical stature is the classic example) are nonetheless very subject to variance in differing environments. No one should take one heritability figure or another as a statement about how much or how little a trait can vary if the environment is manipulated experimentally. Any good, current genetics textbook mentions this.