Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!mcvax!unido!sinix!es
From: es@sinix.UUCP (Dr. Sanio)
Newsgroups: comp.ai
Subject: Re: Genetics and IQ
Summary: (possible) ideological prejudices to be regarded carefully
Message-ID: <519@athen.sinix.UUCP>
Date: 16 Aug 89 16:58:24 GMT
References: <3229@cadre.dsl.PITTSBURGH.EDU> <4537@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu>
Reply-To: es@athen.UUCP (Dr. Sanio)
Organization: Siemens AG, K D ST SP4, Munich
Lines: 55


Some questions and comments about IQ discussion:
In the discussion twin studies have been mentioned. It was pointed out
that a former "classic" inquiry contained faked results.
On the other hand, a newer inquiry on hereditary/adapted capabilities
of twins was mentioned, which claimed to have proved superiority of
inherited capabilities.
Could somebody give a qualified summary of the study mentioned above?
Other bibliographical hints to this subject would be appreciated as well.
If no public interest, pls. mail (thanx in ahead).

Anyway, some comments:
This kind of discussion, which goes on time by time in the universities,
press (and now on the net) very often declines to an emotional or ideological
level (I appreciate that this discussion has developed in a rather quiet and
tolerant athmosphere). Anyway, two things have to be sharply distinguished:
First, the hypothesis about the origin of human capabilities, which can be
summarized as following:
"Certain human capabilities (here:'intelligence' - whatever this may mean)
 are genetically fixed and cannot be significantly influenced - at least not
 beyond a certain level - by learning, education, social or economical circum-
 stances (in short:the environment)."
Or, on contrary:
"Human capabilities - though they may differ by hereditary reasons in a certain
 range - can so widely be extended by training, education etc. that the impor-  
 tance of hereditary differences is small or even zero under long range or lar-
 ge number considerations."
This kind of discussion still remains in a scientific environment and can/should
be carried out sine ira et studio, honestly discovering any fact supporting/
disproving the one or the other position.

Something rather different is the ideological level. It is evident and not sur-
prising that people whith a more liberal/leftist point of view tend to agree to
the second position, because it opens better possibilities for their ideas of
changing certain things in their societies, whereas more conservative people
might appreciate the first position to prove true, as this might strengthen
their position (as far as it is theirs) to regard the current social/political
educational situation in their countries (as far as they may agree with) as 
a quasi-natural, necessary result of evolution, where it is rather foolish to
oppose.
My proposal: Let us ask ourselves:
"Did I find facts proving/disproving the position I agree/oppose?
 Or should I simply wish this to be true/false?
 Am I searching for truth (under this respect) or do I simply try to
 preach my political religion?
 Do I beware suspecting others ideologically rather than listening to what
 they contribute to the discussion?"

Myself, I tend to agree to the second hypothesis, which matches my social
and political point of view, which is liberal/leftist rather than conser-
vative, but I am aware of the danger to be leaded by my prejudices.

I would appreciate the discussion to go on

e.sanio