Gentlemen,
Anyone know of any studies they can point me to online on this subject? Intelligence is a quality which most of us have always assumed was inherited, and my print sources back this up. I'm just interested in any departure from this in more recent studies. I'd also like to know what the modern sources have to say about whether the father's or the mother's intelligence dominates in their offspring, should genetics indeed play a part. TIA,
CD
No one really knows.
There are huge arguments over what constitutes intelligence anyway, and the whole thing is a touchy woke infested subject.
Looking at people who score well in tests its clearly a mixture of nature and nurture.
Ultimately it seems to test for the ability to think in abstract terms and do fast pattern recognition on unkown data.
It's a talent that society needs in a few people, but clearly not in the vast majority of people, or we wouldn't have so many terminally thick babyMakers
My *guess* would be that it's a random gene combination that occurs when both parents have it in a latent form
The incidence of super bright children in the families of super bright parents is not marked.
All my university colleagues who have spawned, have above average kids, but not markedly so.
What's all this about? Are you attempting to blame your lack of intelligence on your parents?
But is that inherited intelligence or just better parenting and the parents realising that early learning and stimulation for their children is important.
Not sure about arguments, but there is certainly no acceptable definition of intelligence with doesn't have some sort of a priori qualifications.
And if you can't define something, it is a little unclear how you can then define an "artificial" analogue of it.
And that's before you consider in an infinite universe, there may well be exemplars of intelligence that we could miss completely.
See also: life.
Well exactly. The inherited part - if it exists - is weak.
Am 02/03/2024 um 10:29 schrieb Cursitor Doom:
If it is inheritable, it didn't work for you.
Am 02/03/2024 um 12:20 schrieb R Souls:
He grew up in a council estate and never met his dad.
"do melon headed parents have melon headed children"
Solve for X.
Then of course, we'll get into an argument whether circumference is better than diameter, as a metric :-)
And there are people with mis-shapen heads. There was one kid in my junior school, his head was shaped like the creature in Alien. He would definitely do better via the MAX(diameter) metric :-)
*******Dammit. There goes my melon-theory.
Paul
Grew up? Hardly!
Well, it's commonly stated that there's no definition for intelligence. However, there *must* be one because we've all bumped into various people in the course of our lives who we simply *know* from a short interaction with them that they're exceptionally bright. Likewise, we've all also met dullards - and there are a *lot* more dullards than there are really bright individuals. So it must be possible to arrive at a definition even if (inevitably) not everyone will agree with it.
Define "bright". And that's where the problem starts.
See above.
I wasn't being casual when I mentioned life. The closest you will get to "intelligence" is something like a "quality in organisms* that enables them to engage with their environment to survive long enough to reproduce". But even then does that apply at an individual, or a group level ?
A very quick way to get someone to f*ck off with their definition of "intelligence" is to gain an admission that dogs (or cats) are "intelligent" to a degree. And then note that all the ones I have tested score 0 on an IQ test. So clearly no intelligence whatsoever. Either that, or IQ tests aren't actually measuring *intelligence*. And if that is the case, what is the point of them, and why would anyone pay for one ?
*See what I mean ?Am 02/03/2024 um 14:36 schrieb R Souls:
Well, I meant "got fatter".
Were your parents exceptional bright?
Yes:
There is loads of evidence and many papers on the subject. The subject is frowned upon by some as it may justify the field of eugenics. It is well known that some cultures perform very badly in terms of social class, and some like to blame that on poor housing and schools etc, rather than the more obvious reasons.
alan_m snipped-for-privacy@admac.myzen.co.uk> wrote
Plenty like Einstein turned out to be completely hopeless parents.
The Natural Philosopher snipped-for-privacy@invalid.invalid wrote
Not really. It is clear that we can breed for intelligence with dogs, so why wouldn't that be true for humans ?
His 'parents' may well have been not quite as stupid as him.
No useful definition, anyway.
Nope.
Bright isnt the same thing as intelligence.
But is that a useful definition ? Fraid not.
But there is no evidence to support that 'consensus'
And you don't see that with animal breeding, so there is no reason to believe that it is true with humans.
And none for that either.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.