Oprano Adult Industry Forums - View Single Post

aeon · 09-01-2003

the variation is .15-.2 between identitical twins reared in similar socio economic situations...enviornment, opportunity. That differentiation varies dramatically as the enviornment changes.

Once we accept there is a genetic component of IQ and accept that IQ measures anything we might all call "intelligence" (that might be dubious and certainly challengable) we can draw another conclusion. Equal opportunities and continued equalization of people's intellectual environment will magnify the advantage of the genetically endowed.

That's not a strong position - you're saying if we accept there are two primarily determining factors to phenomenon X, namely x1 & x2, and we assume that x1 has the ability to be modified & x2 does not. By the sole fact of modifying/enhancing x1, x2 must in someway be enhanced or placed in an advantageous position. There's no reason to assume that & it doesn't follow.

I have two socks - they make a pair...both of them together are the determining factors in the phenomenon of a "pair" - I can change one of them & do so, does that necessarily mean the other changes or is in someway advanced or hindered...no - it just means I've changed one factor of the phenomenon & potentially changed the phenomenon itself - nothing else. It doesn't imply in anyway that the unchanged factor will be in anyway influenced...

possibly equalizing educational enviornment will stifle any "genetic" superiority, or make it's influence irrelevant...or it might do nothing - or it could afford those far greater opportunities...or or or or...

This is the reason behavioral sciences are called the "soft sciences" - dealing with human behavior/cognition involves so many unknown variables it's ability to approach deterministic probability is weak at best. The only way to offset that is to discard the concept of phenomenology & say everything is determined - we just haven't figured out how human behavior/cognition is yet...pavlov & skinner were interesting people but I personally like the idea of free-will - then again...the idea of robbing a bank and not being responsible for it does have some appeal

best of luck -
aeon

09-01-2003	#37
aeon Banned Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 906	the variation is .15-.2 between identitical twins reared in similar socio economic situations...enviornment, opportunity. That differentiation varies dramatically as the enviornment changes. Once we accept there is a genetic component of IQ and accept that IQ measures anything we might all call "intelligence" (that might be dubious and certainly challengable) we can draw another conclusion. Equal opportunities and continued equalization of people's intellectual environment will magnify the advantage of the genetically endowed. That's not a strong position - you're saying if we accept there are two primarily determining factors to phenomenon X, namely x1 & x2, and we assume that x1 has the ability to be modified & x2 does not. By the sole fact of modifying/enhancing x1, x2 must in someway be enhanced or placed in an advantageous position. There's no reason to assume that & it doesn't follow. I have two socks - they make a pair...both of them together are the determining factors in the phenomenon of a "pair" - I can change one of them & do so, does that necessarily mean the other changes or is in someway advanced or hindered...no - it just means I've changed one factor of the phenomenon & potentially changed the phenomenon itself - nothing else. It doesn't imply in anyway that the unchanged factor will be in anyway influenced... possibly equalizing educational enviornment will stifle any "genetic" superiority, or make it's influence irrelevant...or it might do nothing - or it could afford those far greater opportunities...or or or or... This is the reason behavioral sciences are called the "soft sciences" - dealing with human behavior/cognition involves so many unknown variables it's ability to approach deterministic probability is weak at best. The only way to offset that is to discard the concept of phenomenology & say everything is determined - we just haven't figured out how human behavior/cognition is yet...pavlov & skinner were interesting people but I personally like the idea of free-will - then again...the idea of robbing a bank and not being responsible for it does have some appeal best of luck - aeon