Is IQ inherited?

F

francois

Schwat?
Registered Senior Member
What do you think?

There are a lot of people who think that IQ/intelligence is not inherited. I think samcdkey is one of them. I think those people are wrong, and that overall, IQ is a very highly heritable trait.

I'm going to add stuff to this later.

Edit:
Before you start posting away please read these links.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iq#Genetics_versus_environment
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn1520
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/longterm/twins/twins2.htm
http://science.howstuffworks.com/twin1.htm
 
Last edited:
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn1520

From a New Scientist article.

Sez
Genes have a very strong influence over how certain parts of our brains develop, scientists in the US and Finland have found. And the parts most influenced are those that govern our cognitive ability. In short, you inherit your IQ.
Click to expand...
Pretty revolutionary idea.
In identical twins, these areas showed a 95 to 100 per cent correlation between one twin and the other - they were essentially the same. The frontal structure, says Thompson, appears to be as highly influenced by genes as the most highly influenced trait we know of - fingerprints.
Click to expand...

It is not known what exactly "g" is. But these new findings suggest that "g" is not just a statistical abstraction, but rather, that it has a biological substrate in the brain, says Robert Plomin, of the Institute of Psychiatry in London. Plomin has spent eight years looking for genes behind "g". "I'm convinced that there are genes," he says, a lot of them, each with a small effect.

Stephen Kosslyn of Harvard University in Boston questions whether "g" should really be called intelligence. "G" picks up on abilities such as being able to abstract rules or figure out how to order things according to rules. "It's the kind of intelligence you need to do well in school," he says. "Not what you need to do well in life."
Click to expand...
 
francois said:
What do you think?

There are a lot of people who think that IQ/intelligence is not inherited. I think samcdkey is one of them. I think those people are wrong, and that overall, IQ is a very highly heritable trait.

I'm going to add stuff to this later.
Click to expand...
the potential for high IQ is inherited.
it will never be realised without the proper nutrition and environment.
 
How can a number that isn't even uniform across tests be inherited?

Is the number of late assignments you turn in in high school inherited?
 
leopold99 said:
the potential for high IQ is inherited.
it will never be realised without the proper nutrition and environment.
Click to expand...

The genes have evolved in, and expect a certain environment. IQ is inherited, but so are other expectations of the organism. If you starve the body, you are just breaking an expected system. It doesn't mean that you can raise IQ through nurture, only that you can destroy the organism.

It is like saying that a child of two extremely bright parents is supposed to be smart as well, but I held him underwater for an hour, and now he's as dumb as a rock! Must have been his environment.

Almost everything that we need to become what we are is encoded in our DNA. The only other thing needed is some chemicals that the mother injects into the first cell, so it knows how to start dividing. Part of what is encoded in our DNA is the ability to learn from our surroundings. Our surroundings don't teach us how to learn, we have to already have the ability to learn built-in. Another part of what is encoded is the desire to mimic others. So, when we start behaving like other humans, it isn't because those humans are magically injecting knowledge and desires into our brains, it is because we are hardwired to learn through mimicry.

Nurturance only plays the roles in our development that we have already been set up for. I have yet to hear someone come up with a behavior or ability that has a non-genetic component.



Edit: Francois, that link is hosted by a eugenics site. :(
 
swivel said:
Edit: Francois, that link is hosted by a eugenics site. :(
Click to expand...

I'm pro-eugenics. Many of the eminent psychometricians are advocates of eugenics. Shouldn't we all be advocating eugenics?

Take my brother's dog. He bought it from a breeder. It is a yellow lab. Even though yellow labs at some part of their lives (if their lives aren't ended abruptly for some reason) develop back problems and also blindness. The breeder removed these traits from his yellow labs, so they're higher quality. They will be more healthy during the course of their lives because they've been bred that way. Why shouldn't the same be done to humans?

Let's say you're Jewish. Now Jews have a number of genetic disorders that can give them problems during their lives. Let's say you are afflicted with several of those and as a result you are nearly constantly unhealthy and can't touch anyone due to germs. Say, later on in your life that you find our that your parents knew that you were going to grow up to have these problems. Not only that, but they could have fixed those problems even before your cells started differentiating. But... they didn't. They wanted to do it the natural way, because it's natural way--and worse yet, because some stupid religion, which you don't believe in, by the way, condemns it.

Wouldn't that sort of piss you off?
 
Last edited:
Pop test:

How many Nobel winners were the son/daughter of a Nobel winner?

Substitute question:

How many highly acclaimed scientists were the son/daughter of a highly acclaimed scientist?
 
francois:

Who decides what "qualities" are good and which are bad in your eugenic utopia?

What colour eyes do you have? Are they brown? What if the Head Eugenicist decides that brown is bad? You wouldn't be allowed to live.
 
James R said:
francois:

Who decides what "qualities" are good and which are bad in your eugenic utopia?

What colour eyes do you have? Are they brown? What if the Head Eugenicist decides that brown is bad? You wouldn't be allowed to live.
Click to expand...
James,
I think eugenics is inevitable. Ultimately we will probably have a system like that in the movie Gattaca. The parents go in, the doctor collects their genetic material, and the parents custom design their kid to be smart, athletic, and good looking. The lower class who can't afford eugenics, will really be at a disadvantage.
 
The problem is that few traits are controlled by just one gene - especially complex traits. So, when you alter one gene because you don't like brown eyes, who knows what else you're changing? Maybe you're taking away the musical genius gene, too.
 
James R said:
francois:

Who decides what "qualities" are good and which are bad in your eugenic utopia?
Click to expand...

First off, I'm not saying eugenics will result in a utopia. Just a place that is overall better off.
That's a very important question. Humans should be very cautious when deciding what's good and what's not. It's a lot easier to determine what traits are undesirable than traits that are desirable. That's why I think we should select against bad traits rather than select for traits we think we would be advantageous.
For example, I think most people can agree that Tay Sachs or Huntington's disease are genetic conditions that are not desirable to the individual or the population. Similarly really dumb people who are 2 SDs below the mean in IQ are, on the whole, are not desirable. People who are that dumb tend to be very poor. Being just plain poor in itself is not necessarily bad. But being very poor is definitely a bad thing.
I'm talking about fixing things that are overtly and intuitively undesirable.
 
madanthonywayne said:
James,
I think eugenics is inevitable. Ultimately we will probably have a system like that in the movie Gattaca. The parents go in, the doctor collects their genetic material, and the parents custom design their kid to be smart, athletic, and good looking. The lower class who can't afford eugenics, will really be at a disadvantage.
Click to expand...

I just watched that movie a while ago. Loved that movie. And I think you're right. Eugenics is inevitable. The parental urge to give their children every advantage possible is too great.
Hell, if I were given the choice between inseminating a woman with my own sperm or some random dude's sperm who was genetically superior (smarter, stronger, better immune system, better social skills, whatever) to me, I would choose the latter. I would want my (yes, it's my child even if not by blood) child to have every advantage possible.
 
James R said:
The problem is that few traits are controlled by just one gene - especially complex traits. So, when you alter one gene because you don't like brown eyes, who knows what else you're changing? Maybe you're taking away the musical genius gene, too.
Click to expand...

You're absolutely right. That is something that should and, I presume will be taken into account.
 
swivel said:
IQ is inherited,
Click to expand...
really?
you eliminate ALL evironmental input and see just how intelligent you are.
francois said:
Take my brother's dog. He bought it from a breeder. It is a yellow lab. Even though yellow labs at some part of their lives (if their lives aren't ended abruptly for some reason) develop back problems and also blindness. The breeder removed these traits from his yellow labs, so they're higher quality. They will be more healthy during the course of their lives because they've been bred that way. Why shouldn't the same be done to humans?
Click to expand...
you would make a great nazi.

CANGAS said:
Pop test:

How many Nobel winners were the son/daughter of a Nobel winner?

Substitute question:

How many highly acclaimed scientists were the son/daughter of a highly acclaimed scientist?
Click to expand...

James R said:
francois:

Who decides what "qualities" are good and which are bad in your eugenic utopia?

What colour eyes do you have? Are they brown? What if the Head Eugenicist decides that brown is bad? You wouldn't be allowed to live.
Click to expand...
well francois i noticed you completely evaded these questions. why is that?
 
leopold99 said:
you would make a great nazi.
Click to expand...
How do Nazis have anything to do with eugenics? Did you know that Nazis were only an extremely small example of a pro-eugenics group? Your statement may as well be, you "would make a great human being." Thank you. Because most people at the beginning of the century were pro-eugenics. You're only associating eugenics with Nazi Germany because you're an ignorant twit.

well francois i noticed you completely evaded these questions. why is that?
Click to expand...

Fine.
Originally Posted by CANGAS
Pop test:

How many Nobel winners were the son/daughter of a Nobel winner?

Substitute question:

How many highly acclaimed scientists were the son/daughter of a highly acclaimed scientist?
Click to expand...
I have no clue.

Originally Posted by James R
francois:

Who decides what "qualities" are good and which are bad in your eugenic utopia?

What colour eyes do you have? Are they brown? What if the Head Eugenicist decides that brown is bad? You wouldn't be allowed to live.
Click to expand...
I already addressed those questions. If you were able to read, you'd know that.
 
Somewhat, yes.
But completely? What sort of fool would say that all your smarts comes from genes?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top