Specific Genes Linked to Big Brains and Intelligence

[Atreus21]

It's amusing to watch leftists, who never tire of preaching about bigotry, talk about curing the illogical thinking of their ideological opponents with drugs.

 

[yllus]

 

[Iron Wolf]

You know, Moonie, I still haven't heard you justify, either in this thread or the one you started, how I can be both a scientist and a conservative.

As much as some people might like to think so, (including the idiot who posted in another thread that blacks have an average of 85 IQ based on some gibberish he pulled off of the internet) all races have the same average intelligence. I am confident that any studies will (and have) prove this point. It is in much the same way that, contrary to popular belief, scientists have found that, regardless of race, men all have the same average penis size.

 

[Moonbeam]

It's amusing to watch leftists, who never tire of preaching about bigotry, talk about curing the illogical thinking of their ideological opponents with drugs.

Conservative illogical thinking again. As I have said, hundreds of times you can't preach against bigotry. Bigots, like you, preach and were preached to. That's how you became a bigot. It is totally counterproductive to preach to a bigot. A bigot is deaf dumb and blind. Or, you can tell a bigot but you can't tell him much, or a fool convinced against his will is of the same opinion still. What you can do is hole up a mirror to a bigot so that others can see that there is no logical reasoning behind anything he believes, only his own sense of truthiness.

And, of course, bigots are paranoid. They are driven by the fear that God or some great and vital truth will die if they are wrong about what they believe, that the world will descend into hell and chaos. The bigot is a Savior of humanity. Self important ego leaking out of the unconscious.....

So naturally, in your post we see the paranoid notion that if a drug is found that can cure bigotry, you will be forced to take it and that every evil liberal scientist has this on his or her mind. I would hope that as with all cures, the patient has to agree with the treatment. Of course, we could always sneak it into the water, like fluoride, right?

 

[RedString]

Jewish people [ashkenazi] have the highest IQs of all people so its not like this was a ever a question.

I've heard this has a lot to do with their language, and less to do with anything genetic.

 

[Moonbeam]

You know, Monnie, I still haven't heard you justify, either in this thread or the one you started, how I can be both a scientist and a conservative.

As much as some people might like to think so, (including the idiot who posted in another thread that blacks have an average of 85 IQ based on some gibberish he pulled off of the internet) all races have the same average intelligence. I am confident that any studies will (and have) prove this point. It is in much the same way that, contrary to popular belief, scientists have found that, regardless of race, men all have the same average penis size.

I hadn't actually noticed you as being a conservative, but because one of the obvious characteristics of the type is a capacity for profound self deception, it immediately occurs to me that you may simply not realize you're actually a liberal.

 

[Moonbeam]

I've heard this has a lot to do with their language, and less to do with anything genetic.

What language did you hear that in?

 

[RedString]

What language did you hear that in?

English, and considering it wasn't in Hebrew - I don't see how that signifies biased research.

It had something to do with a famous psychologists study of language.. I'm racking my brain and just can't remember his name. He was the man who compared information processing to a computer. Gah.. going to Google.

edit: Lev Vygotsky (Thought and Language)

Pretty much he says thinking cannot happen without language, and compares your language to a tool. If you have better tools for the job, you are more efficient. Not to say with crappier tools (or 'crappier' language) you can't get the job done - it's just easier if you're using a hammer rather than a stone.

Hebrew is arguably, though widely considered, to be the best "tools" for thinking.

 

[BoberFett]

There is a way to fix it. Surrender the iron throne of the federal government, let states resume their capacity to find diverse solutions to their own problems. You don't have to beat Republicans when you can avoid Republicans.

Then, if your polices are so good as you claim, your state(s) will be prosperous and our states will be begging you for your wealth and then modeling ourselves in your image.

You win by succeeding, but you cannot succeed with us at your throat. So don't try. Avoid the federal government and you can circle around to win everything in the long run. That is, if your polices are truly better.

:thumbsup:

Too bad these supposedly "intelligent liberals" will never understand this. Rather than allow those awful conservatives to wallow in their own igorance by themselves, they insist on civilizing the savages. It's like they see themselves living out a 1930s jungle movie.

Talk about voting against your own interest. There was no greater vote against the interest of "liberals" than the Civil War. They doomed themselves to fight against those terrible conservatives for hundreds of years and put up with the likes of Bush impeding their utopian dreams.

 

[Paul98]

Maybe we can get people to take smart pills, it would be nice to not have so many idiots around here lol.

I have always wondered if someone was shown scientifically that they were not intelligent enough to understand something or what they did understand was incorrect. Would they accept that, and if there was a way to correct this would they then change their mind?

 

[Rainsford]

:thumbsup:

Too bad these supposedly "intelligent liberals" will never understand this. Rather than allow those awful conservatives to wallow in their own igorance by themselves, they insist on civilizing the savages. It's like they see themselves living out a 1930s jungle movie.

Talk about voting against your own interest. There was no greater vote against the interest of "liberals" than the Civil War. They doomed themselves to fight against those terrible conservatives for hundreds of years and put up with the likes of Bush impeding their utopian dreams.

I think you've actually highlighted one of the big liberal vs conservative differences in thinking. The liberal way of looking at the world is mainly that we're all in this together to a greater or lesser extent and there isn't really a great deal of "by yourself" actions in a modern society. I think that's a big reason liberalism is almost universally more prevalent the more compact a population is. When you live in very close quarters with a ton of your fellow Americans, rugged individualism seems like more fantasy than reality in many instances.

I just thought your post brought up an interesting point though, I'm not at all defending what you're responding to. The idea that conservatives are universally stupid is itself a pretty stupid viewpoint. Stupid conservatives are stupid, as are stupid liberals, end of story.

 

[dwell]

Jewish people [ashkenazi] have the highest IQs of all people so its not like this was a ever a question.

What does a religion have to do with genetics?

 

[Rainsford]

I don't think there was ever any doubt among rational people that if there are genetic differences that affect all other parts of humans (health, looks, traits, size), it would be highly unlikely that there aren't also genetic differences that affect intelligence.

Of course, racists will try to misuse that kind of information to justify their racism, and political correctness prevents any rational discussion of this type of stuff.

I feel like the racists are really the ones preventing any rational discussion. Based on a long, sad history of people misunderstanding and misusing genetic knowledge, the motives of anyone bringing up anything that sounds remotely like "race X is better than race Y" are immediately suspect. Given that the knowledge doesn't really help on the individual level, the suspicion leveled at people who bring it up outside of a scientific context is sort of understandable.

 

[Rainsford]

Typically, I'm happy to leave scientific debates to scientists. But to the extent the science becomes politicized, it ceases to be objective, and therefore ceases to be science.

Such is the case with global warming.

The problem there is definitely an inability of some people to understand that a debate can have more than two sides. There seems to be this idea that somehow the eco-squad completely took over the science side of the global warming debate, because I guess the idea that they represent a third side is too complex.

Also, it seems suspiciously convenient to be able to just ignore science because Al Gore is annoying (an opinion I fully agree with).

 

[Moonbeam]

English, and considering it wasn't in Hebrew - I don't see how that signifies biased research.

It had something to do with a famous psychologists study of language.. I'm racking my brain and just can't remember his name. He was the man who compared information processing to a computer. Gah.. going to Google.

edit: Lev Vygotsky (Thought and Language)

Pretty much he says thinking cannot happen without language, and compares your language to a tool. If you have better tools for the job, you are more efficient. Not to say with crappier tools (or 'crappier' language) you can't get the job done - it's just easier if you're using a hammer rather than a stone.

Hebrew is arguably, though widely considered, to be the best "tools" for thinking.

You should. English is just not that good to think in. But I do agree with your psychologist friend that thought is the product of language. Now if you could just see that thought is fear, we'd be off to the races.

 

[DrPizza]

:thumbsup:

Too bad these supposedly "intelligent liberals" will never understand this. Rather than allow those awful conservatives to wallow in their own igorance by themselves, they insist on civilizing the savages. It's like they see themselves living out a 1930s jungle movie.

Talk about voting against your own interest. There was no greater vote against the interest of "liberals" than the Civil War. They doomed themselves to fight against those terrible conservatives for hundreds of years and put up with the likes of Bush impeding their utopian dreams.

Help me out again... which states are they who suck more money from Mother Government's teat, and which states are successful enough to pay far more federal taxes than they receive back.

 

[LunarRay]

I feel a lot like Cassandra must have felt. And there's no way to fix it because in the U.S. even really stupid people get to vote.

Not if they have to study for their blood test on Voting day...

 

[LunarRay]

You should. English is just not that good to think in. But I do agree with your psychologist friend that thought is the product of language. Now if you could just see that thought is fear, we'd be off to the races.

Ahhhh,

Not far from my theory that folks who think in metaphors expand the possibilities their potential provides.

The metaphors the conservative thinks in, if he does, are not at all similar to the ones a liberal might think in...
In other threads I put forth the Sermon on the Mount and how it is the Conservative mind thinks contra to that even though they espouse the views expressed by the author... quite confoundedly I'd say.

 

[piasabird]

People have tried to prove one race was inferior based on the size of the skull for a long time. They tried it with Indians and blacks both. It is rather silly. Since we only use like 10% of our brains, there is something else going on that makes one person smarter than another. Besides intelligence is not always the deciding factor for survival. If you look at war it is often the backward degenerate that makes the best general, or causes someone to perform acts of greatness.

 

[BoberFett]

Help me out again... which states are they who suck more money from Mother Government's teat, and which states are successful enough to pay far more federal taxes than they receive back.

Ummm, thanks for reiterating my point?

 

[Zebo]

Genius is one percent inspiration and ninety-nine percent perspiration. - Thomas A. Edison

Or conversely as Forrest Gump said - stupid is as stupid does.

 

[Zebo]

I think you've actually highlighted one of the big liberal vs conservative differences in thinking. The liberal way of looking at the world is mainly that we're all in this together to a greater or lesser extent and there isn't really a great deal of "by yourself" actions in a modern society. I think that's a big reason liberalism is almost universally more prevalent the more compact a population is. When you live in very close quarters with a ton of your fellow Americans, rugged individualism seems like more fantasy than reality in many instances.

I just thought your post brought up an interesting point though, I'm not at all defending what you're responding to. The idea that conservatives are universally stupid is itself a pretty stupid viewpoint. Stupid conservatives are stupid, as are stupid liberals, end of story.

Except they are in a hurry to apply states rights in things where Conservative federal govt overreached. MJ legalization, Gun control etc Basically I don't buy it. It's more like this: Both sides want to be all in this together and nationalize their schemes. Niether side wants a part of the other side nationalization scheme.

 

[Joepublic2]

Since we only use like 10% of our brains, there is something else going on that makes one person smarter than another. Besides intelligence is not always the deciding factor for survival. If you look at war it is often the backward degenerate that makes the best general, or causes someone to perform acts of greatness.

A lot of people repeat this but it simply isn't true. You might only be using 10% of your brain at a time, performing a specific task, but you do use the whole thing day to day. If you didn't use all of it you wouldn't have it in the first place because the nervous system is very metabolically active tissue and people with big lumps of unused brain would have been selected against and bred out of the gene pool long ago.

 

[gevorg]

I think there is much more to it than size, and won't be surprised if in the future there will be discovered better indicators of intelligence such as certain properties of inner working of a brain. Fun fact: elephants have 3x bigger brains than humans.

 

[RedString]

You should. English is just not that good to think in. But I do agree with your psychologist friend that thought is the product of language. Now if you could just see that thought is fear, we'd be off to the races.

When mathematics first was introduced, they were pondering it out of fear?

I'm not sure about that.


Day dreaming, thinking of possibilities, etc.. I can see that, but I don't think I agree that all thought is a product of fear.

I think there is much more to it than size, and won't be surprised if in the future there will be discovered better indicators of intelligence such as certain properties of inner working of a brain. Fun fact: elephants have 3x bigger brains than humans.

It's actual neural density + size that gives intelligence. Though elephants and some whales have larger brains, they don't have the neural density nor the frontal lobe development, etc..etc.. I think what the study is getting to, is if there is a limit to this density, then at this point further intelligence would inevitably result in a larger brain.