The Art of Nonsense, Pathology or Con-Artistry?

[El Kabong]

Not at all because height and size are identifiable genetic components. There are not the same identifiable genes for intelligence. Japanese Culture, Korean culture, Asian Culture is all geared towards activities and practices that bode well for IQ tests. IQ test are not even the unbiased tests they present themselves as. This is why IQ's fluctuate so much among people with very similar genetics. Growing their IQ' s makes no sense, if you think it is genetic that would take many, many, many, many generations to show up. The fact that people can with practice increase their own score again and again in their life time suggest that there is no racial component and that nurture/education etc are THE determining factors.

Like height and size, IQ also has identifiable genetic components.....Peer Reviewed links for your reading if you care to do so.

Genetic Variants Build a Smarter Brain
http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2012/...-smarter-brain

Genes don't just influence your IQ—they determine how well you do in school
http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2014/...-you-do-school

Gene Network Effects on Brain Microstructure and Intellectual Performance Identified in 472 Twins
http://www.jneurosci.org/content/32/25/8732


If IQ was 100% determined by Nurture/Environment then you would be (and I am not accusing you of this at all) laying the blame for those races and ethnicities not achieving as high on IQ tests on the cultures they come from/were raised in and that is (and dear lord I hate to use the word) "problematic" because all cultures value education, all cultures value knowledge and to say "It's 100% nurture/environment" is saying Native American cultures don't value wisdom, education, Black cultures don't value wisdom, education, Hispanic and Latino cultures don't value wisdom education and I don't for 1 second believe that, and I believe that you are not inferring that but you're not meaning to imply it, but this is the crux of the trouble when discussing IQ along with race and ethnicity.


It's by no means an open and shut case either way.

[Beanz]

Not at all because height and size are identifiable genetic components. There are not the same identifiable genes for intelligence. Japanese Culture, Korean culture, Asian Culture is all geared towards activities and practices that bode well for IQ tests. IQ test are not even the unbiased tests they present themselves as. This is why IQ's fluctuate so much among people with very similar genetics. Growing their IQ' s makes no sense, if you think it is genetic that would take many, many, many, many generations to show up. The fact that people can with practice increase their own score again and again in their life time suggest that there is no racial component and that nurture/education etc are THE determining factors.

Like height and size, IQ also has identifiable genetic components.....Peer Reviewed links for your reading if you care to do so.

Genetic Variants Build a Smarter Brain
http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2012/...-smarter-brain

Genes don't just influence your IQ—they determine how well you do in school
http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2014/...-you-do-school

Gene Network Effects on Brain Microstructure and Intellectual Performance Identified in 472 Twins
http://www.jneurosci.org/content/32/25/8732


If IQ was 100% determined by Nurture/Environment then you would be (and I am not accusing you of this at all) laying the blame for those races and ethnicities not achieving as high on IQ tests on the cultures they come from/were raised in and that is (and dear lord I hate to use the word) "problematic" because all cultures value education, all cultures value knowledge and to say "It's 100% nurture/environment" is saying Native American cultures don't value wisdom, education, Black cultures don't value wisdom, education, Hispanic and Latino cultures don't value wisdom education and I don't for 1 second believe that, and I believe that you are not inferring that but you're not meaning to imply it, but this is the crux of the trouble when discussing IQ along with race and ethnicity.


It's by no means an open and shut case either way.

Of course it's never as simple as anyone would have us believe. It's hard enough to see outside our own value systems and cultures without them influencing things and while the IQ test is supposed to do that it really can never be that which it hopes to be.

[Gandalf]

In terms of nurture I would like to beliebe it is more nuture than nature. However, we are a told different things by different evidence. My own experiences suggest there is better academic nurturing here than back home. Kids study very high level maths at a young age, learn English from the age of 5, and most kids are going to private academies. It is a very education driven society. By contrast the UK simply isn't driven in this regard and with dozens of languages in some schools you are going to struggle to get as many on the same page. I would like to believe it is all nurture, but the data seems to suggest this is not so.

Personally I don't mind either way. I am quite aware you are going to get smart and dumb people of any race and you take the person as an individual. I am quite aware that for every great mind like my own you are going to have a dozen plebs impregnating young women and smoking crack and they could be any color. Where I am from they are usually quite pasty looking with ferret like rodenty features.

[Fenster]

The other day I heard a maths expert claim that something like 50-75% of the TEACHERS tested in the UK failed a general maths exam designed for 10-year-old kids in Singapore. That's how low standards have dropped in the UK.

[Gandalf]

The other day I heard a maths expert claim that something like 50-75% of the TEACHERS tested in the UK failed a general maths exam designed for 10-year-old kids in Singapore. That's how low standards have dropped in the UK.

The Maths that the kids are doing here is really difficult. I used to look at some of the homework kids were doing when I used to teach kids and it's really eye opening stuff. You are talking about really young kids. They are at it from a young age with maths, language, music, sciences, and martial arts. It is very impressive. Growing up I didn't really get any of that push to do anything and that's where I do think the kids here benefit from stable families that push and encourage them to do something. That's where I want to believe in nurture, but it would have to be genetic too. I guess in the UK you do get some of that in more middle class upbringings where parents want the right school and the house in the right location, but even then, you are not having kids go to private academies all over the place. You can be a 'real' teacher in the UK, but what does that really mean at the end of the day if they are failing like that? Actually out here the academy teachers tend to be better than public school teachers. I remember when I worked in a public school 2 of the English teachers couldn't speak English. They wouldn't make it in the private market where there is a lot more talent. It is one reason parents want the academy teaching.

[El Kabong]

The other day I heard a maths expert claim that something like 50-75% of the TEACHERS tested in the UK failed a general maths exam designed for 10-year-old kids in Singapore. That's how low standards have dropped in the UK.

I would bet that American teachers are even worse.