I can’t find anything right now on what effect parents’ class (what does that mean? SES?) has on educational attainment for people of the same IQs. Someone else may want to look it up if they’re better at googling than me.
But it doesn’t matter. We already know that wordsum, IQ, and educational attainment are measuring similar things. Wordsum seems like a good proxy for IQ. It gives sensible answers in all the graphs, and it is said to correlate .71 with adult IQ.
Do you have a point, or some sort of theory about what I was saying? Do you disagree with the idea that Republicans are smarter (except at the top end) than Democrats, or that “liberals” are smarter than “conservatives”?
Do you disagree with the idea that Republicans are smarter (except at the top end) than Democrats, or that “liberals” are smarter than “conservatives”?
I don’t.
My point was that using a test that heavily relies on ‘learned’ knowledge such as Wordsum may have exaggerated the effect (compared to what one would see if one used a more culture-neutral test such as Raven’s progressive matrices) when some of the groups have historically been educated more than others for additional reasons besides IQ (even if said reasons correlate with IQ, so long as the correlation isn’t close to 1).
Environmentally in this context just means anything that’s not directly genetic or inherited epigenetic. It doesn’t mean plants and animals or anything like that.
IQ is mostly genetic (in rich egalitarian countries like the USA), but everyone seems to agree that there’s still some environmental factors that smart parents can do to make their children a tiny bit smarter. I don’t know exactly what those factors are though. Probably any kind of practice with thinking and studying would help a tiny bit, but perhaps other things to do with better care such as nutrition. But I know there’s not a lot that parents can do that helps with IQ long-term, especially when society as a whole is already trying to do everything they can to boost IQ environmentally already.
IQ is significantly genetic, but there’s considerably more than a little bit of variance in intelligence between people given the same DNA, and that’s without bringing in the effect of raising people in widely divergent cultures.
But educational attainment is directly caused by IQ, so that wouldn’t make any sense.
Not exclusively IQ—parents’ socio-economic status also matters.
Parents’ socio-economic status is directly caused by parents’ IQ, which is passed on genetically (and a tiny bit environmentally) to their children.
What I mean is, someone with IQ 115 from a upper-class family will be more likely to go to college than someone with IQ 115 from a lower-class family.
I can’t find anything right now on what effect parents’ class (what does that mean? SES?) has on educational attainment for people of the same IQs. Someone else may want to look it up if they’re better at googling than me.
But it doesn’t matter. We already know that wordsum, IQ, and educational attainment are measuring similar things. Wordsum seems like a good proxy for IQ. It gives sensible answers in all the graphs, and it is said to correlate .71 with adult IQ.
Do you have a point, or some sort of theory about what I was saying? Do you disagree with the idea that Republicans are smarter (except at the top end) than Democrats, or that “liberals” are smarter than “conservatives”?
I don’t.
My point was that using a test that heavily relies on ‘learned’ knowledge such as Wordsum may have exaggerated the effect (compared to what one would see if one used a more culture-neutral test such as Raven’s progressive matrices) when some of the groups have historically been educated more than others for additional reasons besides IQ (even if said reasons correlate with IQ, so long as the correlation isn’t close to 1).
Explain that claim, please.
Environmentally in this context just means anything that’s not directly genetic or inherited epigenetic. It doesn’t mean plants and animals or anything like that.
IQ is mostly genetic (in rich egalitarian countries like the USA), but everyone seems to agree that there’s still some environmental factors that smart parents can do to make their children a tiny bit smarter. I don’t know exactly what those factors are though. Probably any kind of practice with thinking and studying would help a tiny bit, but perhaps other things to do with better care such as nutrition. But I know there’s not a lot that parents can do that helps with IQ long-term, especially when society as a whole is already trying to do everything they can to boost IQ environmentally already.
IQ is significantly genetic, but there’s considerably more than a little bit of variance in intelligence between people given the same DNA, and that’s without bringing in the effect of raising people in widely divergent cultures.