The big difference is in the victim. If someone steals food from me, that's bad, but if they rape me, that is much worse. 
 
If a man who is hungry goes into the jungle and picks fruit or kills a wild animal for food, so be it. If a man who wants sex masturbates, so be it. No victim, no problem.

Although the apparent demise of the Flynn effect is bad for the world, it is a relief to me, as every attempt at logical explanation for it fails. In reality humans should be getting dumber; the birth rate is higher and the generation size is smaller at the low end of the curve. If there is a hereditable component to intelligence - even a non-genetic one - the differential birth rates and generation sizes should result in a lowering of the mean.

Natural selection doesn't involve infinite small changes, it involves a finite series of changes, some small, some larger. The larger the change the less likely it is to prove beneficial, but the further it can launch a species across a valley between mountains in the fitness landscape.

These discussions always position that there is something qualitative under debate, but actually it is merely a question of degree. Some scientists feel most changes are small, resulting in nearly continous evolution, while others feel the changes are larger, giving evolution more of a stop-and-start quality, but the underlying mechanisms and overall results are the same.

Ole

You look exactly like I'd pictured. Amazing.

Norming the SAT? Are they serious? The purpose of this test is to determine aptitude. Why don't we just use the scores "as is" without any regard to hair color, foot size, political orientation, or anything else (including skin color). That would be just. Anything else would be a joke.

Ole

I'm just reading Andrew Parker's In the Blink of an Eye. In addition to presenting Andrew's innovative theory about the Cambrian explosion (animals evolved hard parts to defend against predators, which become much more effective when they developed eyes), it presents "the history of life on Earth" in a simple and compelling way. At the halfway point I heartily recomment it...

Another side effect of affirmative action?

Most people reading this blog are Richard Dawkins fans, so I probably don't have to say, but he takes on the evolution of the eye in Climbing Mount Improbable, and shows beyond any doubt that eyes could have evolved gradually. (BTW, there are at least seven completely different kinds of eyes which have apparently evolved independently.) He also deals with wings and other features of animals which at first glance might prove problematic for evolution.

I like "the argument from personal incredulity"! That perfectly describes the objection of all those I know who disbelieve evolution.

Ole

Thanks for the commentary!

Some points: -- The Flynn Effect is real and important. Please follow the links in my post for more information and discussion. There remains widespread disagreement about the cause(s) of the effect, but not about its existence. -- The IQ numbers are not mine. Lynn and Vanhanen developed these numbers carefully, please follow the link to their article for information about the origins of their data. -- Average IQ doesn't say anything about any particular person, particularly in populations with millions of people. You have the cannonical bell shaped distribution. -- I found it amazing that India's average was 81. My contact with people from India must be with the right edge of the curve. -- There are not "obviously" cultural things related to IQ test performance. Over the past thirty years pyschometricians have refined IQ tests carefully to elminate cultural bias. People invoke tend to postulate cultural bias when they disagree with test results. -- The impact of nutrition on IQ is limited. Studies designed to measure this (e.g. identical twins raised in different environments) fail to show much correlation. -- After the age of five IQ is pretty invariant for any particular individual, regardless of their environment. I would not expect the low average age of sub-Saharan countries to be a significant factor in their average IQ.

Ole

The Americans With Disabilities Act has other unintended consequences.

Like when my company needed to remodel part of our two-story office building, and found we'd have to add an elevator, thereby quadrupling the cost of the project. This despite having no wheelchair-bound employees, and plenty of first-floor offices and conference rooms in case we ever do hire one.

As always, common sense is the first causualty of these laws which are intended to help a minority.

Ole

Always switch. You have a 66% chance of winning vs. 33%.

Here's another one. You are given a choice of flying a twin engine airplane which needs one working engine to fly, or a three engine airplane which needs two working engines to fly. Any one engine has the same probability of failure in either plane. Which plane is safer?

Ole

Unnatural Selection Indeed!

"Gene Expression is all about the connection between humanity's genetic substrate and the emergent social organization that we see all around us."

So where does this letter fit in, exactly?

When I click-through from SharpReader the tag line at the top of the page is as I quoted; perhaps a template needs editing. But that's beside the point.

GNXP is valuable as a place for dialog about, well, Gene Expression. I have a personal blog as do many of you and that's a great place to put whatever the heck you want. Posting "Dear Laura I went to see Howard Dean" on GNXP doesn't fit. My humble opinion...

Ole

Okay, sorry. Overreaction. A clear result of unfortunate cross-breeding :)

Marinara - great questions, and I received similar in email, which prompted a new post: What was M.E.? Thanks.

I should clarify that I'm not opposed to social welfare. I just feel it should be more intelligently deployed. For example, what if we gave poor families a tax credit for having fewer children? That would help them (they would be better off with fewer kids to support) and it would help society (fewer poor kids). Note I said fewer not none. I know it won't happen anytime soon, because at present it is wildly non-PC, but it is worth considering... Thanks for everyone's comments!

Consider this quote from Howard Raines (in the NYT):

“You have a right to ask if I, as a white man from Alabama, with those convictions, gave him one chance too many by not stopping his appointment to the sniper team. When I look into my heart for the truth of that, the answer is yes”

How can anyone say this case doesn’t involve lefty bias or affirmative action?

Ole

IQ is an emergent property of humans, easily measurable. It is valuable to the extent that it correlates with other properties which are less measurable, and/or has predictive value. The degree of correlation determines the usefulness.

For example, if IQ is predictive of success within a particular job, it would be useful to screen applicants for that job.

The Bell Curve is particularly interesting because it shows that IQ correlates to social phenomena like criminality or parenting skills. Unfortunately the current political climate prevents use from being made of this.

Ole