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.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: KyrosL who wrote (23544)	10/5/2007 5:49:25 PM
From: carranza2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 217711

I think what is not disputed is that the intelligence distribution curve is broader for males than for females. That proposition has more intuitive appeal to me [because I'm ignorant of the stats] than the proposition Mq was advancing. I think intelligence is related in great measure to the environment in which the child is raised and the stimulation he receives during childhoold. The more stimulation, the more networked the brain becomes and, probably, more proficient. On the other hand, the distribution curve you refer to may very well be a function of culture. Men/boys have traditionally had more opportunities to deploy their mental horsepower. Thus, we may see more geniuses and imbeciles who are male but perhaps only because they are more visible. There may very well be an equal proportion of female geniuses and imbeciles who have not been captured as such because they are burdened by homemaking and childrearing duties. It's a fascinating subject.