Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : To be a Liberal,you have to believe that..... -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Alexander who wrote (5358)	1/13/2000 4:03:00 PM
From: Neocon	Respond to of 6418

Well, one should indeed be careful about making too much out of one test, for example, as people sometimes vary over the years, and also there are sometimes wild differences in areas of intelligence, the idiot savant phenomenon being only the strangest. But the main thing is that even if about half is heritable, that leaves a lot that is not, and therefore one should not draw broadly racist conclusions. Over time, gaps may close......

To: Alexander who wrote (5358)	1/13/2000 4:53:00 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6418

It depends on how you define IQ. They were very specific that they WEREN'T measuring things like artistic ability, etc. They were measuring problem solving and other areas which they believe are conducive to measurement. You can't, for example, test whether person A is a more creative basketball player than person B, but you CAN test whether they can bench press more, have a higher leaping ability, etc. So the key is to look at what is being measured.