| > You think a person is smart only if he goes to school. I have never said this. It is a well-established fact that schooling is not just correlated with IQ, but actually causes an increase (Husén & Tuijnman 1991). > A person from 2000 years ago has the same potential to get a phd as anybody as in our time. ...and you ignore my environmental arguments entirely. And yes, I've read Hamming's lecture several times. Hamming was a great scientist. However, he was both not a social scientist, and he was addressing a room full of scientists at Bell Labs, one of the most effective research institutes in the 20th century. No one mentioned IQ because everyone there already had all the IQ they needed! Bell Labs was one of the brainiest places around! It was on par with MIT, where even the secretaries used and programmed early Emacs! It'd be like discussing how to become a great programmer, and mentioning that you need to be alive. It's a prerequisite that's already met; discussing it is an utter waste of time and balmy. Nowhere does Hamming say, 'and btw it doesn't matter if you score a 60 on an IQ test and can barely dress yourself in the morning, you just need to follow my suggestions and you have a shot at the Nobel!' Because that would be idiotic. Rather, Hamming at the very beginning states: > "I saw quite a few very capable people. I became very interested in the difference between those who do and those who might have done." He assumes from the beginning that he is discussing 'very capable' people and why some accomplish great things and some don't. > Go on believing that only a selected few chosen by God were given the gift of being smart. Hey, why give up? Doesn't Hard Work Conquer All? |
very funny