Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!mit-eddie!think!ames!cit-vax!oberon!sdcrdcf!randvax!lincoln
From: lincoln@randvax.UUCP
Newsgroups: sci.philosophy.tech,sci.bio
Subject: Re: Knowledge and the Academics
Message-ID: <301@iris.randvax.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 16-Jun-87 01:21:02 EDT
Article-I.D.: iris.301
Posted: Tue Jun 16 01:21:02 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 20-Jun-87 00:41:36 EDT
References: <16224@brahms.Berkeley.EDU> <160200002@inmet> <2172@mmintl.UUCP> <123@snark.UUCP>
Reply-To: lincoln@iris.UUCP (Tom Lincoln)
Organization: Rand Corp., Santa Monica
Lines: 59
Xref: utgpu sci.philosophy.tech:177 sci.bio:391

In article <123@snark.UUCP> eric@snark.UUCP (Eric S. Raymond) writes:
>In article <2172@mmintl.UUCP>, franka@mmintl.UUCP (Frank Adams) writes:
>> I am curious about why "is intelligence heritable?"
>
>Intelligence is *extremely* heritable.
>
>Empirical evidence: the I.Q. and aptitudes of identical twins raised apart are
>quite strongly correlated -- sorry, I don't have numerical statistics handy.
>
>'Intelligence' is a multidimensional composite of aptitudes in several
>distinct areas.
>
>All of this data is discussed, from a strongly environmentarian viewpoint,
>in Stephen Jay Gould's _The_Mismeasure_of_Man_ -- a book I recommend for
>facts and style while disagreeing almost totally with its analysis and
>conclusions. Gould is a fine and lucid writer when his Marxist sympathies
>are dormant.
       .
      (
      .)
     (().       CAUTION
    ()((       FLAMES   >to see light through the smoke.
   {\@@/}    AT WORK

>What seems to be true is that heredity sets a fairly hard upper limit on
>the capability of the brain to do particular kinds of information
>processing (things like, say, spatial visualization).

>Environmentarians believe the inherited limits are generally well above
>the performance level of typical individuals, so that there's plenty
>of room for improv(ement)...

It is interesting that the Japanese have competative categories that lie
above the present masters. I believe that the top 35 master categories
for the game of GO are empty. We, by contrast grade on a sliding scale..

>Hereditarians believe that individuals routinely push their inherited
>limits;

It simply defies credulity to suppose that todays couch potatoes are
pushing their inherited limits - or any other limits. If we try Toynbee
(why not add an historian) - there is some evidence that the best challenge
is neither too severe or too easy (usually whatever society that those
who write about such things - and feel they are pushing their productive
limits - live in represents their parochial estimate). See such books as
"Why Jonny can't run".

>My personal opinion: the hereditarian claim is unpleasant, but fits the 
>observed statistical facts better than most versions of the environmentarian
>thesis.

Well, someone with that opinion who tries to read Stephen Gould is probably
pushing his/her limits.


 |\ /|  .
 {O O} .   Its a dog's life, eh Sandy?
 ( " )                           lincoln%iris@rand-unix.arpa
  `U'