Correlations between socioeconomic status and success of one's offspring in educational systems don't mean that intelligence is inherited in the genetic sense. If you're seriously arguing this, you're very close to flirting with eugenics and the like.
> If you're seriously arguing this, you're very close to flirting with eugenics and the like.
Please don't be so eager to reject eugenics that you end up being anti-science. The idea that some percent of intelligence is genetic is entirely reasonable, not something to refuse to consider.
I did not say nor mean to imply that genetics do not have anything to do with IQ or intelligence. Also, context matters - this is a thread about how to structure educational environments and about certain specifics of the military. Genetics are a factor that is going to be of limited practical use in this domain, at least as far as I can fantasize OTOH.
> I did not say nor mean to imply that genetics do not have anything to do with IQ or intelligence.
Please explain what "Correlations between socioeconomic status and success of one's offspring in educational systems don't mean that intelligence is inherited in the genetic sense." means because it sure looks like an argument that the genetic component isn't real.
Especially because you posted that in response to someone talking about heritability in very general terms, so your comment can't be interpreted as a nitpick about which evidence goes where. And I can't think of any third interpretation.
> this is a thread about how to structure educational environments and about certain specifics of the military
The idea being presented is that it's easier to run good schools when you have smarter students with smarter parents.
So the inheritability of intelligence over a single generation is critical to the argument.
seems like a disbelief in heritable intelligence (absurd) is drawing some to use the US military as a shining star of schooling innovation without strong evidence. so seems clearly relevant and useful in this domain to identify which interventions actually work and which are just composition fx
What do you think "the heritability of IQ" means? It seems from the thread that you believe it's genetic causation of intelligence. Is that what you're claiming?
I think that's how zevon interpreted it, so that's what I responded to.
Personally I would include other methods. And for the argument about schools method doesn't really matter.
Edit: And I don't know if genetics are the biggest factor in single generation inheritance, especially at a younger age, but I do think they're a reasonably significant factor after looking at various estimates.
you seem to have taught yourself explicitly incorrect intuitions about how the world works, why? the vast majority of people know that kids resemble parents, it seems extreme to believe otherwise.
They gave up on the traditional IQ test questions for the most part. The ASVAB (Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery) is mostly a knowledge test now. You can find sample questions online.
There is still a section on spatial reasoning, which is trying to get at a general mental ability.
You qualify based on the AFQT, which is a composite of four ASVAB subtests.
Specifically, the Word Knowledge, Paragraph Comprehension, Arithmetic Reasoning, and Mathematics Knowledge subtests.
Sample questions:
(identify the best synonym for the underlined word)
His record provides no reason for _apprehension_.
[ ] anxiety
[ ] change
[ ] enjoyment
[ ] endorsement
According to the passage, some artists work with titanium because it
[ ] is transparent.
[ ] does not corrode.
[ ] generates its own heat.
[ ] can assume a variety of colors.
One in every 9 people in a town votes for party A. All others vote
for party B. How many people vote for party B in a town of 810?
[ ] 90
[ ] 720
[ ] 801
[ ] 819
The ratio 36 : 12 is the same as
[ ] 2 : 1
[ ] 3 : 1
[ ] 4 : 1
[ ] 5 : 1
You might notice that this is obviously an IQ test. What were you thinking?
(Source of all questions, and the definition of the AFQT: www.officialasvab.com )