Comments on: 25 Facts About IQ You Probably Don’t Accept

By: Hard Work Is Overrated: 11 Uncomfortable Facts About How IQ Affects Your Life « InvestmentWatch

Wed, 23 Nov 2011 00:34:29 +0000

[...] the environmental effects on IQ, heritability still plays a bigger role in determining overall IQ. Environmental factors can mean the loss or [...]

By: 11 Uncomfortable Facts About How IQ Affects Your Life | Website Development in India

Wed, 23 Nov 2011 00:32:16 +0000

[...] the environmental effects on IQ, heritability still plays a bigger role in determining overall IQ. Environmental factors can mean the loss or [...]

By: Daniel Miessler

Daniel Miessler — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 18:50:54 +0000

Meh, some random blogger. What do they know....

:)

I think the question is how persistent that improvement is.

By: CarlM

CarlM — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 18:46:31 +0000

Then you might find THIS interesting:

http://dmiessler.com/blog/iq-can-be-improved-si…

By: Daniel Miessler

Daniel Miessler — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 18:37:09 +0000

My instinct is that you can budge it a bit, but not by much.

This is very interesting stuff to me (how many experts agree on this topic), and I'm going to be doing some research on it, by asking some people I can find in the field what they think. It'll still be a limited viewpoint, but I hope it'll be enlightening.

By: CarlM

CarlM — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 18:09:55 +0000

"IQs do gradually stabilize during childhood, however,
and generally change little thereafter."

So, Daniel, you no longer believe that an adult can study/practice
and improve their scores on an IQ test (or otherwise improve their IQ)?

By: CarlM

CarlM — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 18:05:36 +0000

The Wall Street Journal has some history with "scientific" publishing.

http://www.reall.org/newsletter/v06/n08/global-...

And as for how hard it is to get 52 scientists to sign on to a paper
... this one (the WSJ article .. now updated a bit)has over 31000
people who have signed on in support. This does NOT make it true.

http://www.petitionproject.org/

But, if you think that a group of scientists saying something makes it
true, then here is a site you should see:

http://www.ridgecrest.ca.us/~do_while/sage/

By: Daniel Miessler

Daniel Miessler — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 17:50:03 +0000

The piece supported some of the content of the book, but not all of it. Notice how they treat the policy issue; they basically leave it alone, and that was one of the main angles from which the Bell Curve was attacked. In short, it's far less forward and volatile than the book was. From my viewpoint it was a statement saying, "Well, we don't completely support the books conclusions or all of its analysis, but here's where mainstream science is on a few key points, and on those points they were correct." But that's just my interpretation. In other words, they didn't come out and say, "WE SUPPORT THE BOOK." They were careful to say which few points they agreed on.

Question: after the controversy regarding the Bell Curve--how easy do you think it was to find 52 scientists in the field of intelligence to sign this paper, and then to subsequently get it published in the journal Intelligence?

It' true that some of the people who signed the paper were on the board for the magazine, but that almost supports my argument as much as the opposing side, i.e. these WERE mainstream scientists in the field.

By: CarlM

CarlM — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 16:22:04 +0000

“The interesting thing about this paper was that the paper represents a consensus on what science knew at the time (1997) about intelligence”

This just isn't true. It's a piece published in the Wall Street Journal that supported the claims presented in the book “The Bell Curve.” IT is FAR from a consensus of what science knew even at THAT time. “The Bell Curve” was pretty well debunked soon after it came out. See for example:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0HSP/is_…

and

http://books.google.com/books?id=8-INL7qF5l8C&p…

and elsewhere. (I've no time to do more of this research at the moment.)

By: Daniel Miessler

Daniel Miessler — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 14:50:54 +0000

Meh, some random blogger. What do they know....

:)

I think the question is how persistent that improvement is.

By: CarlM

CarlM — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 14:46:31 +0000

Then you might find THIS interesting:

http://dmiessler.com/blog/iq-can-be-improved-si…

By: Daniel Miessler

Daniel Miessler — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 14:37:09 +0000

By: CarlM

CarlM — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 14:09:55 +0000

By: CarlM

CarlM — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 14:05:36 +0000

By: Daniel Miessler

Daniel Miessler — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 13:50:03 +0000

By: CarlM

CarlM — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 12:22:04 +0000