@@chillindylan99 you are a bigot drived by bias and not science. You could don't like it but it's true, g test aren't biased cattel test differences are that other test; and environment play a role like he said but the mesure he's using class epigenetic effect as environemental
@@Tom-qz8xw gosh what could Dylan have written, that the Amorite strain has been genetically culled for about 3500 years since Marduk and Nimrod started up Israel, which had formerly enclaved 60 cities of the giants of Bashan? I'd read the lost book of King Og for those politics.
Fascinating. The most interesting part is how highly intelligent people create environments that propel further increases in inherited intelligence. (5:20)
That's just his hypothesis. He's not sure if that's true or not, it's an open question. The problem is that over time, the differences among individuals in regards to intelligence is caused in greater proportion by genetic heritability, which means that environmental factors become negated. However, this is counterintuitive. He proposed that the individuals benefiting from positive environmental factors only benefited because they were already heritably intelligent and placed themselves in these environments to further and confirm their own intelligence.
@@b4u334 it's even more significant than that. When you equalize chances of opportunity by a secured environment like yours (health system to prevent and treat diseases and traumas, plentiful and constant access to supply to eradicate undernutrition, compulsory participation in a free public school system to ensure good intellectual development and the assurance of acquiring the basic skills to participate in society, sanitary habits over everyone and especially children (no smoking, alcohol and drugs during pregnancy...) an so on...), it maximize consequently the expression of the genetic differences between people since practically no more environmental factors can interfere with people cognitive development.
When I was 11 and took an IQ test I scored 113. I also had a lot of difficult things I was going through: I grew up poor, in Foster homes and violent environments. When I turned 19 and my life was a little bit calmer I scored 143. It was very surprising so I had to take the test again. I got a 144! I hate telling people this cause I am a little embarrassed and don't like the silly associations that come along with such a result. Furthermore, I am in constant debate about the validity of these types of tests and what that really mean. I think the disparity was due to my environmental factors changing: my life had gotten better, I was in college and I didn't have to worry or stress as much about immediate threats. My mother is not very smart. I don't know what her intelligence is and it is hard to ascertain if her cognitive ability is diminished due to the stresses she grew up with (because she also grew up I'm Foster homes and had a tough upbringing , and it has really affected her mentally) or some genetic factors. But hey I made it out of my predicament. Was able to travel and live all over the world and have great success up to this point. And I often wonder if that is due to my supposedly high I.Q., some resilience I gained from my harsh environment or was it a combination of convoluted luck and support from outsiders. Maybe a fusion of all those things. But through my experience I do believe that our measure of success is due to how we react to each situation and the steps we take forward. Intelligence would help us parse out the paths that have higher possibilities for success. But also a myriad of other factors are in play; such as ones beyond our control, our ability to deal with stressors, etc.
"When I was 11 and took an IQ test I scored 113. I also had a lot of difficult things I was going through: I grew up poor, in Foster homes and violent environments. When I turned 19 and my life was a little bit calmer I scored 143. It was very surprising so I had to take the test again. I got a 144! " Stress and other factors will really affect the results so good job
AL: I would argue there is some merit in an IQ score but it is problematic. I came from a poor family and like you I was tested several times and the range was between 115 - 139. ( Real-world Intelligence? I'm somewhere in the top 90-95%) I quit High School and joined the NAVY, my education is largely informal (I read) and I am a lifetime student and critic of public education. Time and again I demonstrated problem-solving skills and earning capacity. There is no degree on my wall but I can hold my own in nearly any circle. My brothers too demonstrate above-average intelligence and we are retiring very comfortably in a Country Club minutes from the Gulf Coat of Fl. A few years ago a granddaughter called and asked about IQ. Her daughter scored a 128 and was placed in advanced classes. I chuckled and told her all is well. I am a GED $ millionaire, and one daughter is a GED multimillionaire, the granddaughter that phoned is also an HS dropout and she is well on the path to retiring before she is 40. She is drop-dead good-looking and wicked smart. Evidence genetics are at work. IMHO: I can teach an HS graduation class more in an afternoon about success than they likely heard the previous 3 years. The first lesson: Choose your company wisely! Cheers.
@@1Skeptik1 I also think habits and mindsets are extremely important. When it comes to hereditary traits, there is a genetic component; however, the characteristics we impart on others from our friends to family or even quick exchanges with strangers are immeasurably vital. And of course, how those people absorb and use what was imparted upon them, and vice versa. There are some that seem to be born with some innate skill that affords them the ability to succeed even when the odds are stacked against them. And sometimes it can be perplexing when trying to figure out where that came from. Even how our brain develops in the womb has profound impact on us after we are born. For example if someone had more growth in their prefrontal cortex, it would most likely be easier for them to visualize scenarios than most people. And this could help them succeed in many areas, such as Mathematics; assuming they had a desire to learn it. Perhaps that aptitude would seem exceptional and cause people to believe they are of greater intelligence; however other areas of their brain may not have had as much development because of more growth in their prefrontal cortex; such as the Wernickes area, which consequently made language and speech more difficult for them... I could go on and on and get more convoluted...just the subject of Intelligence is often times looked at in too simple of a manner. Intelligence and what affects it, how it can accurately be measured, what it really is, etc., is extremely complicated. And we still don't have a great understanding of what intelligence really is.
I would assert that the disparity might actually be more to do with your age. Just like how our physical body goes through a transformation and significant growth during puberty, I would assume our intelligence does as well. At least in my personal experience this seems to be true. Carefully looking back at my school years from 1st to 6th grade, I was, for the lack of a better term, quite dumb(relatively speaking). But the level of understand that I had during my class in the years that followed significantly increased along with my grade. I would catch the smallest of errors that teachers sometimes make or quite often corner some of them with a topical question that they couldn't answer then proceed to answer it for them. No significant environmental factors played part in this shift. Regardless, I am almost baffled that people would not consider intelligence to be primarily driven by genetics. When almost all physical traits rely on our genetic makeup, why would you assume that intellegence is something drastically different. Of course, the two shouldn't be lumped as an identical phenomenon and that any metaphysical truth dealing with the brain naturally implies a complexity that is yet to be discovered for the time being. But my main argument would be that the general direction in which intelligence is driven by genetics follows that of its physical counterpart. Well, I just realized that I'm meandering with this reply without giving much substantive argumentation but I am quite literally burning time at the moment so I will just leave it at that. Maybe I will take it a bit more serious and flesh out my arguments if anyone is willing to engage on this topic.
So right. I'm your basic poor Hispanic kid that was born with a high IQ. 138 and I did not get told about how smart o was just how good of an artist I was. Got older took on the piano then got older became a physics need. And now all i do is seek knowledge and understand emotions, people, art, philosophy, science all of it is now in my hands because of the internet. Peopld like us now have everything we need to learn. I thought I was weird all my life because I saw the world differently and felt others did not see it. Now I am a IT administrator all self taught from online. I make great money and have a girl that matches me. The jobs and knowledge are out there. We just have to fight for it.
I'm mostly Spanish Jew and I am super smart outside of school and inside of school. But I don't care about being smart and arrogant, instead I want to be working towards be richer.
Stands to reason. Practically everything else about us is influenced in some way by genetics, so it would be strange if intelligence wasn't. And: Intelligence testing is contentious "for some people" - a nice way of putting it.
Nobody cares... Because true intelligence lies in understanding genetics and human conciousness and then being able to modulate anyone, like making someone run as fast as bolt or play football as good as CR7 or be a 50linguial or be a great entrepreneur such as musk or be a great songwriter as sheeran or just anything without changing there basica conciousness: But no one's smart enough to understand genetics and human conciousness Hence proved we are jus worms suspended on the mercy of the physical universe
@@ecurb10 You care because you're mentally fragile. Imagine needing affirmation that your so called genetic group is the most superior for intelligence. This is your own insecurity
A lot of the anger in this thread comes from an inability to handle nuance. Plomin says "intelligence has a genetic basis" and people assume that he is racist because one time someone that black people had inferior genetics. Under no circumstances does that mean Plomin is racist. He's a scientist that is reporting some of the most robust statistics in psychology, which has been confirmed repeatedly through twin and adoption studies. The variance observed in intelligence between the races is widely believed by psychologists to be mostly accounted for by environmental factors, and I'm sure Plomin would be agree with their opinion. Please actually think for yourself instead of becoming emotional and blindly reacting.
African Americans have a significantly lower socioeconomic status and SES has been correlated with intelligence. You are looking for any statement to confirm your racial bias. In no way did he say that there was no environmental factor... I know you are not intelligent or educated enough to understand that correlation does not equal causation, and that is why it is hard to untangle genetic questions like this. There are certainly genetic differences between the races (e.g. skin color, prevalence of diseases), that does not mean you can attribute every observed phenotype to strictly genetic causes. There are epigenetic and environmental factors that affect gene transcription and translation, and the African American population suffers significant insult from their environments. It is likely that there are genetic differences in intelligence between the races, but they are likely to be very small considering the short evolutionary timescale since they diverged. Please know your place and refrain from commenting when you don't know anything.
"People misunderstand what he says who are racist, therefore he is racist" no. "biology should apologize for the untold damage their discipline has done to humanity" like every form of medication you have ever taken? Every medical treatment you have ever received? Plomin doesn't even mention race one time in the video. There is no reason for you to come on hear and name-call everyone trying to participate in a discussion. I know you are confused and the world is a scary place, but try to settle that conflict internally.
When scientists say "black people are less intelligent than whites or east Asians are more intelligent than whites", those who take it to mean that they are advocating genocide or slavery are the ones who are the problem. There are plenty of such people on both the left and the right.
Genetics are everything. Life is about having the best genes and competing for the mate with the best genes. If intelligence is an evolutionary adaptation that allowed us to thrive, why wouldn't intelligence be inheritable?
Matthew Jones it clearly determined yours and the fact that no one liked your comment shows you probably won’t be passing them onto the next generation you pathetic incel 😂😂😂
I just finished his book entitled, , "blueprint: how DNA makes us who we are". It was very interesting. It helps to understand a bit about statistics because he makes countless references to certain statistical outcomes in the book. He is a proponent of using genetic data to begin to identify the heritable propensity for certain mental illnesses in order to improve upon historical psychiatric methods of diagnosis. The book makes a lot of sense. But it also seems to show that even genetic testing can only go so far in explaining ALL of the variances in human behavior. But it can explain enough to make it worth doing.
At 11:00 - if you remove all the environmental differences you're left with genetic differences....makes sense. That's exactly what Jordan Peterson maintains with regard to gender difference.
1. Genetic potential is a factor in outcome 2. Genetic expression is what we do with the potential. This is easier to see and accept when we look at machines. I have a very powerful computer on my desk, i7 processor, maxed out RAM, etc. When working with large databases this helps me greatly. The programming or "code" determines the outcome to a larger extent in the quality of raw power. Most humans do not question and examine the code they are running. 3. Quality of outcome on a long time line comes down to examination of beliefs and actions and results. 30 years ago I was in a computer class, the hardware at that time was very slow... We had to turn off the calculations in the program and then run the program later when we wanted to see the outcome. (go get a coffee : ) MOST PEOPLE QUIT prior to hitting enter. Fat people can become thin, poor people can become wealthy, etc. It requires more effort. The exception is below the threshold of minimum level to play. 4. If the machine "crashes" before we get the answer due to a shortage of computing resources you never can get the answer... YES, some folks have a shortage of resources. 5. Have fun with what you have been given. Hack the program enjoy your life. Explore, Create, Grow. 6. The impossible just takes a little time longer : )
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4711841/ All this estimates are bullshit. No genetically reliable proof of heritability of IQ or (g). The only stidies that have high heritability estimates are environmentally confounded twin studies and ureliable GCTA datas. So no proof so fare for his arguments.
@@sounkoumahamanetoure4607 why deny reality? MZ twins raised apart have extremely similar IQs. Adopted siblings are no more similar in IQ than two strangers randomly selected off the street. People differ in general cognitive ability due to differences in brain structure, and genes build brains. None of this is controversial if you think about it for more than 10 seconds.
First we have to accept that genetics are the very reason that we are intelligent. Otherwise you could bring our cousins like chimpanzees or gorillas to our level by education which obviously fails. So our intelligence is the result of evolution and that requires a genetic component. Secondly the Flynn effect is most likely the result of the liberlization of education and career opportunities to the masses after hunderds of years in which you basically were stuck with the occupation of your ancestors. So there were very intelligent shoemakers who had no opportunity for education or career. This changed after WW2. Then we had a peak of people now freed and to search their place in live and to choose partners which were on their level. This produced more of intelligent offspring who themselves chose their opportunities. But this is obviously not meeting the rates from the first years.
Additionally, we need to take into account that better nutrition has followed the same curve. The brain is a very expensive organ from a nutritional point of view. Higher protein diets undoubtedly have had an effect, and have permitted individuals to maximize their biological inheritance. Also, over that same period, the average height has increased. Once again, showing the importance of nutritional improvements over time. Both brain growth and height have genetic limits. Good nutrition helps us to reach those limits.
In Communist Russia, back in the 1930s genetics (along with cybernetics) was a banned science, and geneticists were sent to GULAG death camps. It was not politically correct to say that genes exist or that genes play any role in human development, only the environment matters.
@@alexneigh7089 That's right. Genetics in the Soviet lefty shithole union would have destroyed all the myths and fakes claiming that races and ethnicities are all about the colour of skin. In Communist Russia interracial and interethnic marriages were pushed forward and mixed couples could get better jobs or promotion from the Party (hardly anybody would acknowledge that, but this was also the reality). So funny to see this happening again but to western world. I wonder how they ended up like this?:) In the USSR people had been brainwashed with the same Marxist propaganda till the fall of the country, never thought that Europeans and Americans would get into this shit.
The Flynn effect has nothing to do with Liberalism. It's nutrition, medicine, and literacy. The Chinese, despite living in a totalitarian 1984-esque state where millions toil like robots in sweatshops, experience the Flynn effect just the same.
There is a 100% overlap between people who argue against this and people who associate being “smart” with being “good.” They want to think “dumb people” are “bad people.” So they must CHOOSE to be “dumb.” Meanwhile, I have a kid with a (clearly inherited) reading disability. She’s sweet and loving, loyal and good at her job at a bakery. She didn’t CHOOSE to have a hard time reading. Her sister is a straight-A, honours student. Stop associating intelligence with “moral value” and it becomes much easier to understand that genes really do determine school success.
@@denniscliff2071 Because of the heritability emphasis. This obviously extends to different groups who on average test differently on IQ tests. The accepted explanation in academia for social differences nowadays is social conditioning.
@@denniscliff2071 because it runs against the current post-modern ideology, which denies difference among people's abilities (while at the same time claiming to embrace diversity).
@shadow inc If i am understanding you correctly, the variance in IQ between groups (races), is the variance between average IQ scores in those groups. An average IQ score of 72 in one group compared to that of 100 in another group may not seem significant but it is hugely significant in that the one group cannot be trained to perform the simplest task compared to the 100 average IQ group. A person needs an IQ of at least 120 to be able to understand engineering principles. People who are two or three standard deviations above average are responsible for modern technology, science, medicine, and all aspects of advanced civilization. These people are in an extreme minority and without them we would still be hunting and gathering and depending on sharp sticks to survive.
I have noticed that people with high general intelligence are healthier, good at many sports, and demonstrate higher moral and aesthetic sensibility. Also, people of mixed race who grew up in various environments (e.g. different countries) are often more adaptable, creative, and socially aware.
I remember this kid in class. Both his mother and father were doctors. I was constantly amazed how fast he picked up anything. One might think well he had resources, his parents made good money. But there was more to it. We were presented something new, no way even he heard or knew about it. He picked up faster than any of us. -- And of course, he became a doctor too, just like his parents lol....
My mother couldn’t even grasp the most basic multiplication, nor did she in her 30+ years in America, managed to learn how to string two English sentences together. I live with the anxiety of knowing that there may be, because of her low intelligence, a natural limit to what I can learn.
@@oneldelorbe1413 I heard this from a talk show host. When we are born we are given a bunch of cards (meaning talents) then we have to play those cards. You have talent in other way, just find them and use them.
being born with a low iq is a curse. Especially when the fields you like require a high iq. Being doomed to work a shitty job because the happenstance of an egg and sperm fusing is torture. It should be illigal to have kids without being 100% sure that their genes wont make them dumb, unmotivated or neurotic. If it ever were to become possible id love to gene edit myself out of this living hell.
None of us are doomed. There are plenty of people that are mediocre in intelligence tests, but are happy and productive members of society. You can do a lot to improve your lot in life. Conversely, there are a lot of highly intelligent people that aren’t necessarily happier or contributing more to society. There are also traits like creativity and moral intelligence that are harder to measure, but matter even more. If society is getting more intelligent, then why are we as a species more unhappy than ever? Maybe it’s less about standardly measured intelligence and more about personality traits that make us happier and contribute to the happiness of others in society.
Until we get supercheap robots powered by supercheap electricity, we’re still going to need people to do things like pick fruit, sweep floors and wash dishes. Especially in countries where people seem to be incapable of maintaining any type of mechanical equipment and that would include robots. 😮
@@w.gabrielselassiei6139 nope [Robert J. Plomin, FBA (born 1948) is an American psychologist and geneticist best known for his work in twin studies and behavior genetics.] en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Plomin
A very good point that intelligent people will tend to seek other intelligent people/environments. This will again further their collective intelligence. If we find that our environment lack the stimulus that we seek, we will change it. However i do believe that we have different kinds of intelligence e.g Math, Social etc. Meaning that the intelligent problem solvers will tend to seek more difficult math/problems to solve, while emotional intelligent people will tend to seek out more complex, and interesting people, perhaps challenging their point of view.
I am very struck by your comment and I agree with the fact that people are guided by the search for environments that are related to their type of dominant intelligence.
Formal IQ tests are broken down in to different components. So, the things you wanted are assessed on IQ tests. A person may do better at a certain set of skills and not as well on a formal IQ test. Also, there has never been any objective data compiled to study "emotional intelligence."
Could motivation to learn be a factor? Some people don't really care about learning, some are insatiable learners. But is there a limit to what someone is able to learn, even if they really want to learn it?
Genetics determines how you start, not how you finish. You may learn quickly but with the wrong attitude you will not go far. You may learn slowly, but with the right mindset your compound knowledge will take you far. This has been proven by neuroscientists. The brain may not physically grow, its connections does, improving your intellectual capacity.
To an extent. Self discipline is probably heritable. Social skills and success can at times mean more. The unabomber was very smart. Not to successful. Just a thought.
I have a hypothesis. A common theme is that human DNA is highly regulated; a lot of non-coding DNA is regulatory DNA. As we age, we experience increasing amount of environmental influences that increasingly favorably regulate inherited intelligence DNA leading to an increasing contribution of genetics to our intelligence. This could explain the increasing influence of genetics on intelligence as we age.
"increasing amount of environmental influences that increasingly favorably regulate inherited intelligence DNA leading to an increasing contribution of genetics to our intelligence" can you explain this part
The teacher could identify the intelligent student from low and middle income parents, remove the student from the classroom, and place the student in a high quality independent study program. This works because it worked for me. Individualized education with independent study for intelligent students works, and can democratize education.
To end world poverty we have to understand human prosperity which means we need to understand human differences which means we need to end society's taboo. Debate on human differences isn't hate! It's an important part of science!
What does it mean 'to end society's taboos'? If you're saying that somehow a BTS member breeds with a black girl is going to cause indifferences and ends world poverty then why is it that in developing world countries where many people are of the same culture and have no indifferences live in poverty ? For example the Maya people live in huge poverty and crime rates so high?
I wonder how good are any types of IQ tests mentioned here, if the outcome can be effected with small things like what person ate for breakfast, his financial situation, how much sleep he/she had, etc... So many biological factors.
4 роки тому+1
I can answer how good IQ tests are. No other test has EVER been invented that comes within a standard deviation. This is the gold standard. Nothing on earth comes close. Every low IQ human/race/nation has attempted to discredit IQ and create a new test that does not put them at the bottom. The USSR worked on this with 1,000s of "scientists" and Russia still is working on this. When you talk shit about the quality of IQ tests you are showing your willful ignorance. Every military on earth worth it salt uses IQ as its #1 sorting tool.
The outcome of an IQ test is rock solid, with only about +- 2 points of difference for the things you mentioned. Your concerns are a classic sign of slightly lower intelligence, because if you worry that you might not be adequate for a task, let's say coding, it usually means you aren't. People who code complex algorithms fast and efficient while doing the required math and mental rotations in their head effortlessly, they know they are adequate, they can feel their own understanding. You will never see those people being worried about their own IQ - their IQ allows them to know they have a high IQ
@@LjosiI took several intelligence tests on Google, and I took 114 places, another 66, another 140, and another 120. It's a terrible difference How can I know the correct one?
@@abdogames5975 those are not real IQ tests. Online tests are scams, even just falling for those scams reveals you have a lower IQ. Any reasonable person knows that only government administered IQ tests taken under timed supervision are legit (military, employment office, psychiatrist,..)
9:08 I have heard-tell that bad halogens like bromine have been added to table salt as a replacement for iodine. I would like more information on this because apparently not only did adding iodine to table salt in 1925 reduce iodine deficiency, it apparently increased general IQs as well. If iodine levels in table salt have been removed or significantly reduced, would this have caused the recent tapering of general IQs?
Does this mean that if someone is extremely verbally intelligent, they could’ve been equally spatially intelligent if they had developed that ability as much? Are there any genes that are just good for one intelligence but not the other?
he just said there's a correlation (known as "G") between all the categories. It just means that a person with high verbal intelligence is going to have a proportionately high spatial intelligence. For example if you had a verbal score of 7/10 then you wouldn't have a spatial skill of 1/10, it's going to be something closer to 7 like 5.
there is a tendency which supports your question, it´s the g-factor if intelligence. The thing is that this factor mostly influences the speed we process different categories of tasks. If you see me doing a math problem I have never seen before ten times faster than the average person, you can expect me to be able to create a verbal rhyme at least 5 times faster than average. But concerning the giftednes in the specific subjects, we do see the pattern of multiple intelligences. Many people who are able to talk almost like Goethe concerning their verbal CREATIVITY often cannot solve most university level math problems even after hundreds of hours of hard study. Summary: So, concerning processing speed we have a universal intelligence but concernig originality we can proof Gardener´s multiple intelligence hypothisis. (Meaning a fast person in English will be fast in maths as long as we are only talking about processing what is already there. As soon as we enter problem solving land, people differ most often in their ability to excell in the relevant endavour)
@Kent Horvath There is absolutely 0 evidence for multiple intelligences. Personality or physical abilities aren't intelligences, and all of that variability in ability is already explained by the general factor of intelligence.
@Kent Horvath I can read studies, as can anyone else. If you can link me even one study on multiple intelligences and a working neurological model that replicates, but you won't because there aren't any.
What does he mean when he says heritability increases or changes? Is he defining heritability as something different than inherited traits? Also, I noticed his comment about stopping people from passing their wealth onto their children. That one will go over quite well.
I believe he means that, as environmental differences are reduced, genetic differences become even more significant in their effect on measurable long-term performance.
Recent DNA studies have identified specific distinct DNA variations called single nucleotide polymorphisms, (SNP) linked to IQ. The challenge is that by examining a million humans about > 1000 DNA variations have been found that explain only about 10% of human intelligence. This means much more work needs to be done to explain all of genetic influence on intelligence. Each genetic variation explains a tiny amount of intelligence, e.g. 1 DNA variation = 0.05 IQ point. The biology is complex and the statistics are complex.
@@nollhypotes Please read Wikipedia page on Plomin, he does believe in differences in average is between different human populations to be at least partially genetic in origin. You can argue whether he's right or wrong on that, but that's what he believes
@@nollhypotes Well, then, I didn't understand it that way, but Plomin might have simply contradicted the other things Plomin has said during his career. He is one of the people who signed these conclusions: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mainstream_Science_on_Intelligence Please read every single paragraph of it, especially the last ones. They specifically address the racial and specifically mean group difference. Again, you can argue whether he is wrong about it or not, but this is what he believes in as well as many other scientists "left" from him, i.e. the ones more on the environmental side of things, like, say, James Flynn do.
Furrowed Brow the conclusions may be racist, but blame nature for that. There does appear to be disparities in intelligence between the different races, and these disparities are likely to be the result of genes. However, that doesn't become an argument to judge individuals based on their race. Exceptions obviously do exist.
Tobias F citation for what? I'm not stating a fact but rather my conclusion. You should've asked me to provide reasons why I came to my conclusion. And what exactly is the evidence for the disparities being environmental?
Tobias F for one, I have yet to see any evidence for intelligence being influenced by the environment. Never have I come across specifics. If you can provide me with scientific, peer-reviewed studies that specify the environmental component(s) that adversely affect intelligence, I will be happy to be more open-minded. "The environment plays a role" isn't adequate enough for me. I need to know what specific components of the environment have been unequivocally shown to adversely affect intelligence. My default position must be what is existential rather than hypothetical. We have found genes responsible for intelligence. Thus, I am compelled to believed what is clearly proven and well-developed
So so strong is the colloquial meaning you want to start changing words that mean specific things in the science community? Sounds like a great plan 😃😃😃😃😃
"Heritability increases with equal environments" (11:20) I never actually thought about the gene x environment theory in this way - but it does make you wonder.... the whole equality of opportunity debate is centered around the fact that we will become more equal regarding socioeconomic measures but what if we instead actually cause a greater divide between people? Say that we construct an environment in which we think we best cultivate intelligence based on previous observations (how does the environment look in families where brilliant kids are raised? how does the school environment look? etc). That environment would not be the best environment for everyone - it would be a highly specialised environment where people with high cognitive ability excel, leaving people of average or low cognitive ability even further behind. Maybe what we call "equality of opportunity" isn't equality of opportunity at all, but indeed a highly specialised environment where we put even more emphasis on heritage than before, giving a certain group of the population an enormous advantage?
So in other words, as long as low-intelligence races exist in a society, it will hold them back from achieving a society where intelligence is cultivated and valued and where human potential and technology will be advanced. Sounds like an argument against multiculturalism to me
Interesting. So at the end, this guy is saying that in a perfectly fair world with no discrimination, the measured heritability of iq would be extremely high
It's only natural that removing other factors which influence [thing] would cause the remaining factor that influences [thing] to stand out more. If one removed all non-genetic factors which affect IQ, genetic factors would be responsible for all remaining variation. Likewise, if one kept society unequal but somehow ensured that everyone was genetically identical in all relevant ways, social factors would become responsible for all remaining variation. Discourse around IQ is shot through with the nature vs nurture fallacy. The truth is that all observed behaviors are always 100% genetic and 100% environmental. They are how that organism responded to that environment. Change genetics or environment in the right way, and the result will have been different.
Nobody cares... Because true intelligence lies in understanding genetics and human conciousness and then being able to modulate anyone, like making someone run as fast as bolt or play football as good as CR7 or be a 50linguial or be a great entrepreneur such as musk or be a great songwriter as sheeran or just anything without changing there basica conciousness: But no one's smart enough to understand genetics and human conciousness Hence proved we are jus worms suspended on the mercy of the physical universe
so what does this mean if theres a 15 point gap between racial groups? could it be that wealth gaps have little to do with racism and in large part are genetic?
@@alexneigh7089 Actually there are African countries that are now showing great progress. Try looking at this very hopeful video. ua-cam.com/video/fRsFT11CxSk/v-deo.html
@@joanblond8527 Than you for the link. I am trying to figure out what is their secret. My version: they were lucky with their president (and his son), and they are blessed with natural resources. I am glad they appear to have made it with their $18K GDP per capita, and I hope they will keep the good thing going.
Actually it could go either way. He predicted that if we got rid of family advantages then heritability (as a percentage of variation) would increase because environmental factors would decrease. But if iq is genetic then smart families can give advantages, maybe such large advantages(to people who are on average smarter) that they overshadow luck and chance and magnify outcomes by iq.
Every single sociologist: "Intelligence has nothing to do with genetics. IQ differences are down to social differences and environment. It's not inheritable." An actual geneticist: "Intelligence is inheritable."
Well I'm a sociologist and I beg to disagree. We do take biological factors into account whenever they meaningfully contribute to subject of the research, but the thing is, genetic influence on intelligence is outside our field of expertise and is still debated on in gene scientist circles, and as such we still operate on assumption that genetic influence is negligible.
Heritability means "some kind of genetic component". He said in the video that at most 50% of our intelligence is explained by genetics. Which leaves the other 50% down to environmental factors like education, nutrition etc.
@@bloomerboi21 I thought I was doing something wrong, I remember I would study from dusk to dawn and understand the material, then everything would mix in my head... 10 years in college, then 2 years in UTI, then back in school for water distribution, you can't tell me I'm not trying... you know what your right, I'm like a duck, I can fly, swim, and walk, I might not be the best at any, but I know how to do it... also my dad is schizo and my mom suffers from depression so, I have to keep close attention to my own sanity. Thank you for your may or may not sarcastic comment? "it really got me thinking"
Don't blame your parents because they didn't mean it. Intelligence isn't everything. The most important thing is to enjoy life and do what makes you happy.
@@mimigigi1061 and that is exactly what I'm doing.😃... I study to know, not to make money... I married a business person so I can use my free time to help my community. I worry about the environment so try to come up with ways I can help, then raise awareness.🙃... Plus I'm on meds that help me with my general depression so...that helps a lot.
You know...for once - from a teleological perspective at least - I'd say YT would do the right thing by censoring Robert Pomin out of the fucking internet. I really like him as a speaker and I believe to everything he says but I think no one understands the shitstorm this is going to raise 10 years from now.
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4711841/ Or thr guy is just wrong all the long. The only plausible datas for his genetic argument are environmentaly confounded twin studies. And since the assumptions for twin studies calculation(the Equal Environment Assumption) are obviously false, his point argument his without basis.
I am thinking that people are less intelligent now when I see social media posts- haha. I don’t have a high intelligence according to genetic markers yet I was able to achieve many of those things associated with high intelligence. Some markers on the DNA sequence seem to suggest that some people with higher brain volume are able to learn and analyze things differently. While in school I remember being put in average classes and thought for some reason I might be smarter than the people around me- haha. When it came to a class in geometry - I recall failing my first test and thought wait a minute - I think I’m smarter than this. I took the book home kept rereading and taking the practice tests in the back of the book (this is before the computer age) and voila next test I received an A. I had to ignore the situations at home that were pressing on me as a teenager- i.e. difficult bipolar mom. I am a senior and I am still interested in learning - I am learning a new language and it’s been very rewarding. This man is very intelligent.
No he says we start off with a small difference in IQ between individuals and that this has a heightened disparity over time (especially during childhood). He then suggests that this small difference in IQ guides us to stimulating environments, that are in layman's terms deemed as 'intelligent'. Like a positive feedback loop our intelligence is able to get to full capacity if the environment is optimal. This in turn has an effect on the environment we're in (more stimulating), and the way people perceive us, and, our motivations and positive associations with difficult problem solving. All of which in turn manifest itself in a higher ability to problem solve.
@Zach cash An issue with the studies is that they're mostly twin studies so assume that the twins have the same environments, which isn't necessarily the case especially for monozygotic twins as they may be different genders and in turn, this assumption poses issues for the research methodology/ validity. Also, the genome studies and twin studies are based on associations (correlations/ regressions) of phenotypes (e.g I. Q) with genetic similarities so can't directly suggest cause. At the moment it's suggested about 60% of your intelligence is genetically based and all this is through something called additive dominance which is where genes basically have a small effect but add up to create one phenotype (being smart/not so smart). I love plomin, and I'm not saying intelligence doesn't have a large genetic element - but we can't discount how our environment shapes our genetics too (take a look at epigentics v interesting). I was just trying to explain a particular element of what he said in a way that I think was pretty accurate
@Zach cash so I suppose yes, in a way he's proposing that if we're naturally a bit smarter we seek out stimulating environments and this makes us even more smart in the long run due a snowball effect But this particular idea is just a theory And it has little empirical evidence
Wish he would've gone into the hypothesis that heritability correlates higher over time because the brain is more fluid when you're younger and genetics have a higher impact than we'd like to admit.
Note the general intelligence is most closely tied to verbal intelligence, particularly the ability to perform well on analogy questions. Next down the line are the following verbal elements: vocabulary, reading comprehension and then grammar and syntax (to which sentence completion questions relate).
I am suspicious about what we know about environmental vs genetic heritability. One thing I never see addressed is that individuals can get very different IQ scores taking the test at different times in the same few years, and whole groups can get wildly lower scores when they are under stress. This has been shown with seasonal workers. We also know that simply being in a lower social caste or class affects the brain by being either a long time lower ranked member of society. It's possible that many of our ancestors didn't experience that, because much social stratification in pre-history was cyclical or temporary.
So it's similar to our job interest as Jordan Peterson points out that in society with more equal opportunity those genetic tendencies related to choosing job path are more visible and man tend to choose more masculine jobs and women more feminine jobs.
People's backgrounds, educations and experiences are different across the board. Is there a study that shows IQ test results of people of different races of the same age who all had the same educational background and got the same grades in school?
@@summerrr1 I take it that this is some kind of insult. I had to look up Mr. Men. I'm still unclear as to what it is. I met a guy when I was in the army who read five books a day. It's mostly justly a function of how many hours a day you read. I do read some small books. I read the Osprey Duel books (tanks and planes) and they are quite short. But I also read some full length non-fiction books like this one. This year the best such book I've read is by Charles Murray.
3:56 Yet even the other 50% that is attributed to the environment is also of a genetic nature in the overwhelming number of cases because our environment is modeled by people who are in most cases genetically similar to ourselves, starting with our parents. So in my opinion g is 100% genetically determined.
indeed, genetics and education are the same if it is both given by your parents. But to know if the parents have a true impact on the intelligence of their childrens, we first have to know if intelligence is heritable. Once we know that, we can say what make a person. If intelligence is educational, then we have the possibility to re-educate ourselves and we can better understand why we are unable to do things that we thought were impossible to do because of who we are. And i dont trust scientific studies that talk about intelligence, especially when the guy seem confident about it and keep spitting words and words but no "?"
Flynn effect? What I have noticed is a drop in ability to read , write, do math and complete in society. Due to reduced education and loss of interest.
Your observations agree with the science. If you google the Flynn effect you'll find it has been going reverse for several decades - we are becoming dumber.
@@hwfq34fajw9foiffawdiufhuaiwfhw It's across all Western nations. IQ peeked for those born in 1974 and has been declining since. Those born after that date faced easier exams in an effort to increase the numbers going to university. When they were being pushed, it affected everyone, even those who didn't go on to university. IQ is now 3% lower than it once was.
In school genetics play a big role,the holy grail of genetics is people being able to improve their intelligence through genetic modification,academic performance and creativity will improve drastically
education is extremly impactful, as big impact as you think genetics are. Motivation, role model, safety feeling. All of this literally determine how much a person is going to try and get interested at school
IQ is like height. It's genetic with a smaller environmental factor. A person whose genetics says 6'4" can grow up to be 6'2" with poor nutrition. But they will never grow up to be 5'6" and vice versa. Genetics sets a small window for what you are. Environment can only help you maximize within that small range.
how do you explain asian peoples coming to europe and suddenty getting taller than white peoples themselves. I have miultiples white / asian mixed friends that are taller than me. And im not small, my dad was 6.2 foot
His last point is very interesting. If we were to maximize the environmental effects for each person; that is, give each person all of the education, social benefits, etc. that he/she could benefit from, we would still have intellectual differences, but now those differences would be based entirely upon people's genetics. Heritability would then be very high. There is no way to homogenize the population's intellectual abilities. As it stands now, we can rationalize away intellectual differences by attributing those to differences in experiences and opportunity. How would people feel about themselves and others if they were forced to recognize that those differences where based entirely upon their genetic endowments? There would be nowhere to hide from that reality.
Clinical psychology is guilty of navel-gazing. There's too much orthodoxy and all this talk about statistics hides the fact that the so-called predictability isn't nearly as real as purported. "80%" in statistics is not a predictive factor; it's the characteristic of a log-normal distribution. Also, the Flynn effect is a ridiculous fluke of metrics: By that model our ancestors 25 generations ago would be complete retards, which they weren't. Plomlin talks about science but clinical psychology's methods are far from being reliable. My problem is not that they're on a path to doing science; my problem is that they claim theirs is already is an evidence-based scientific domain. Far from it.
It seems to me that if the heritability of (g) increases with the age of the person, intelligence not likely to be related to environment. This would make sense, of course, as there's a mechanism (alleles) for the formation of the brain, but no known environmental influence on its formation _in utero._
What he says at 11:21 is the same Jordan Peterson says about differences in temperament and interests between men and women in countries where more gender equality politics have been applied. In other words, when you make the environment equal you magnify biological differences.
If you're giving a recorded-presentation like this and aggregating the findings of "many scientific studies" as unquestionable fact, you need to provide sources for those claims. There are none linked under the video, and there are none in the "read the text version here" link. You present some interesting ideas, very eloquently. Some quite well-reasoned, some displaying logical fallacies (to greater or lesser extent). I'm inclined to agree with most of what you said. But the conclusions you're drawing here are, as you state them, rooted solidly (not conceptually) in scientific studies - since you're using those studies as _direct evidence,_ you need to source those studies so we can individually assess their context, their scope, their limitations, etc. before we just take your word for them.
interesting and expected that at least some of our intelligence is inherited. While some is from our environment. So, what do you do with that between maximizing human potential and freedom to parent as you see fit?
I saw somewhere that you can reach between 5'10 and 6'1 with the same genes, by diet. e.g. eat foods when you are still growing that stimulate growth hormones.
The wild thing about doing two dna tests and getting high depression and bipolar, my sons autistic but comes up gifted with circleDNA and intelligent is 95% with nebula DNA , but he’s limited in life. I think even though I suffered some of the same I used my intelligence to fight through. None of this is created equal
But wait, how do we know what kind of early mental stimulation one child benefited from over another child? Which child's house was full of books? Which child had a full time mother/father? Which had parents who took an active interest in their education? How do we know which child's diet was nutritionally rich, and which child was malnourished? I could go on and on with this. There are so many hidden factors involved in a person's development that it seems somewhat foolish to put it down to genetics.
The factors that you described aren't as hidden as you think they are. Plus, parents with higher intelligence will be able to read to their children and generally provide a better environment to foster their child's physical, educational, a d psychological growth.
I think that increased inheritability with age is mostly due to the fact that only by age of (roughly) 25 the brain developes fully. So measuring intelligence of not yet developed brain is like measuring the speed of car that is not finished. And it is not surprising that adults of the age 25+ show more than 80% heritability of IQ.
The analogy doesnt explain the percentage change at all. It only explains why measuring iq at the age of 25 ist the most accurate. The question is why the build plan of the car changes with age.
@@Alex-bl8uh it does. The build plan doesn't change, the performance does. Also i don' think you understood what i was talking about. The measurement is accurate across the age, not just at age of 25, the heritability increases till age 25 and then stays the same.
That's why IQ tests are calibrated to specific age groups. The relative ranking of IQ remains the same. A child who has a higher IQ compared to his/her classmates at age 7 will tend to have a higher IQ compared to those same classmates at age 37.
@@nonono4160 The problem solving skill of someone with high IQ is very likely to be well above average. This ability is there at a very young age, kid who is very smart will find more creative ways to build lego blocks, another will perhaps be able to create a few pieces of a puzzle with a piece of carton, and coloured pencil if a puzzle stored somewhere isn't complete. This problem solving skill will enable to solve more difficult problems later in life, for example some people can detect signs that something serious is causing their health issues and seek help at stage 1-2 of cancer whereas others are less fortunate and get a correct diagnosis at stage 4. Heritability on the other hand increases steadily. A gifted person at 25 will perhaps regularly lose arguments with a professor 20 years older than him, but at 35 will be able to give a better account of himself with the same professor, because he has read more, has had more verbal duels with his peers, and his mind is more adept at forming thoughts that enables him to focus on the matter being discussed and quickly come up with counter offensives to whatever the professor throws at him. That's why a 50 year old person with an IQ of 135 will be a better CEO than he would have been at 25.
@@redshift8302 the thing i was talking about was the fact that the measurement of IQ showed that the degree of heritability was growing with age untill teh age of around 25 (which conincidentally is the same age when our brain fully develops). After that the heritability staus at around 80%.
Over the decades there have been numerous attempts to debunk and dismiss IQ... they failed. And the reason that they failed is because IQ has predictive validity. If something has predictive validity it means that we can use it to make consistent accurate predictions. We can take a million people, all with an IQ 90, and we can basically give you a rough estimate for how many of them will serve prison time, how many of them will graduate college, the average amount of money they will make, heck we can even estimate how many of them will die in a car crash (because lower IQ people tend to drive faster, and are less likely to wear a seat belt). Environment is of course important, as this video explains. And IQ is by no means the only factor for determining 'success.' IQ also says nothing about whether you are a good person or not. There have been many intelligent people that have been complete monsters. Also, IQ doesn't necessarily have to mean 'smart.' What is smart is ultimately subjective. You can view IQ tests as nothing more than a tool for making predictions about a population or a person. And we are ALWAYS dealing in averages. An average does not mean 'all.' If a person has a 130 IQ we can give you a percentage for how likely you are to finish college. But even if you have a high likelihood of finishing college, that still doesn't guarantee that you will finish college or even be successful. My IQ is 131 and yet that didn't stop me from becoming an alcoholic (which luckily I was able to stop drinking, thank God). But yeah, my point is, IQ is a powerful tool for prediction, but please don't think its somehow going to decide your life for you. It does still matter though, and the reason why it matters is because the race IQ gap is a thing. Yes, Ashkanazi Jews have a higher average IQ than East Asians, and East Asians have a higher average IQ than non-Jewish whites, then Hispanics, and then blacks, and then Australian Aborigines. Its not racist, its just the grim reality we live in, and its nature being a total bitch as she often is. Again, I can't stress enough that we are talking about averages. Its not that all East Asians have a higher IQ than Hispanics, its that there are MORE East Asians with a high IQ then there are Hispanics with a high IQ. I'm not saying that racism doesn't exist, racism obviously exists. But disparities in wealth and income... racism just can't account for that. The idea that non whites are poor and always being thrown in jail because white people are oppressing them... that, quite simply, cannot be accounted for entirely by racism. IQ is playing a part here. Its by no means the only factor involved, but it is still a factor. And we're eventually going to have to accept that if we ever want to make things better.
IQ only has predictive value in fields where its measures are valid. IQ is not a significant predictor of success in life or income. Environmental changes in the last century have correlated strongly with changes in IQ.
Yes, IQ is valid in fields where its measures are valid, and all the examples I gave are quantifiable. No, I'm afraid IQ is a significant predictor of success, its not the only factor, but it is a significant factor. A great example would be many music artists. I don't think anyone is going to argue against the notion that your average MTV star isn't exactly that bright, yet they are still making quite a bit of money off of a talent that they have. So yeah, IQ isn't the only factor in play, but it is a factor. And yes there have been environmental changes in the last two or so centuries that correlated strongly with IQ changes. The most important of these changes occurred right before the Industrial Revolution in Europe where the wealthy and middle class were out breeding the poor. The fact of the matter is that people with higher IQ tend to accumulate more wealth and they're more careful with their spending, and the conditions of Europe at that time favored the rising merchant class and their offspring tended to have more offspring. This caused an IQ spike in the population which may very well have led to the Industrial Revolution. So, yes, environmental factors can and do have an effect on IQ. I... don't see how that disproves anything I said? And yes, IQ rates have been going up in general around the world, that's the Flynn Effect as stated in this video.
A pregnant mother can help her child reach a higher potential by not drinking alcohol (which is the worst thing a mother can do to a fetus), taking biotin and other vitamins, and enough natural fats (which are necessary for nerves and neuron growth), having a safe, natural birth to assure adequate oxygenation during the birth process. Brains develop into puberty so getting enough sleep is important, avoid lead, mercury, heavy metals as they interfere with brain development.
I kept telling my 4th grade teacher that I could never learn to do long division. She got mad and forced me to stay in class during recess. Then she forced me to learn long division. It took about 10 minutes.
It is okay and I know this is an old video. However, if the IQ test is correct, how the video didn't discuss the increase in IQ scores for east Aisa during a short period of time which cannot be correlate to genetics!?
The rise in IQ scores with increased access to education, healthcare and nutrition is known as Flynn Effect, but the Flynn Effect is "hollow for g". An IQ test is made up of a variety of subtests with varying "g loadings", subtests with a higher g loading are more representative of innate intelligence, while lower g loaded subtests are more trainable. Flynn Effect increases the latter.
Hmmm....notice how people of East Asian descent tend to have a much greater likelihood to thrive in life and to build advanced societies no matter where they are (Asia, USA, Europe, etc?)
Attractive people date other attractive people, picking people based on wittiness, humor indicating intelligence... and then there's still people who think intelligence doesn't have genetic components?
Most Anglos and Hispanics agree Germans are the most impressive immigrant group to the Americas. From Argentina to Alaska they have changed destiny. Had the Germans not endured the first Thirty Year War (1618-1648) and the second Thirty Years Wars (1914 - 1945) would they be so extraordinarily intellectually and emotionally discipline? “What does not kill you makes you stronger” Nietzsche Few people learn from their errors quicker than Germans.
Excellent talk - RP is so damn smart. Its disturbing that our society requires/rewards inherited intel more and more over the decades. Like gender race or baldness or weight - its something we can't help. See Yuval N Hariri's "useless class" problem and it is our biggest challenge as a society/planet.
I think IQ tests measure raw brain power for the most part. And for the most part, a lot of people like that in your society is an advantage. However it doesn't say much about life success due to "x factors" like creativity and ability to navigate social situations. Those are just as valuable as being a really smart computer lol. Honestly, a lot of people in the comments section of these vids sound like incels or people who mostly stay indoors.
Sounds like a cope, hence why you resort to the demeaning insults. After all, creativity and sociability are personality traits determined by genetics as well, and ultimately, you have an issue with the reality that determinism is real and environmentalism is a myth.
@@fuwa9616 It's not cope. High IQ individuals are not necessarily socially skilled. That's something you need to develop (or discover) when you're exposed to a wide range of social situations from before puberty. On the determinism vs environmentalism...you need to be careful how you present those terms. Even hereditarian authorities don't claim that environmental influence is a myth. And even if you have high processing power to quickly recognize and reason with information, you can still fall prey to cultural influences. Humans are socially programmed to follow the pack for the most part. It was probably a product of ancestral living conditions.
@@fuwa9616 Your statements are invalid. Creativity and sociability can be influenced by genetics, but they are not determined by genetics. The genetic influence on both of these traits is between 20% and 60% at the highest. The remaining percentage is attributed to environmental factors, and as you can see, environment can potentially be a stronger contributor. There is no personality trait in which can be attributed solely to genetics. To claim that environmental factors aren't an influence, is an outstanding cope.
Fun fact: Heritability is different in each environment its studied. For example, the Heritability of high IQ in Japan is very different than the Heritability of high iq on the US.
Cough cough. Genetics. Japan is full of Japanese people, the majority population. Yes, there are Americans of Japanese decent in America, but they are the minority. America has more racial groups and in greater numbers in America than Japan does.
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
professor plomin is a great example of eloquence and dedication, listening to him is always a joy
Certainly is. Does not imply he is right. Yet, it's well know that humans are inclined to conclude that.
toopid fool
This guy is pathetic
OK Suck-up ;--)
@@MartinLichtblau Are you suggesting he's not right?
based on my ability to understand this video, I have a low IQ.
sucks to be you
ROFL, same here..
kyle robinson nah nigga ur just dumb in general it’s got nothing to with you u incel 😂
You are not alone. Don't underestimate the power of low IQ people in large number
@Darth Maul the N word is what a white man called us and thats we call each other thats what makes us dumb
This guy has inherited a lot of intelligence
@@chillindylan99 you are a bigot drived by bias and not science. You could don't like it but it's true, g test aren't biased cattel test differences are that other test; and environment play a role like he said but the mesure he's using class epigenetic effect as environemental
@@Tom-qz8xw gosh what could Dylan have written, that the Amorite strain has been genetically culled for about 3500 years since Marduk and Nimrod started up Israel, which had formerly enclaved 60 cities of the giants of Bashan? I'd read the lost book of King Og for those politics.
Duncan Crow that book sounds interesting
New vegas
Yupppp
Fascinating. The most interesting part is how highly intelligent people create environments that propel further increases in inherited intelligence. (5:20)
That's just his hypothesis. He's not sure if that's true or not, it's an open question. The problem is that over time, the differences among individuals in regards to intelligence is caused in greater proportion by genetic heritability, which means that environmental factors become negated. However, this is counterintuitive. He proposed that the individuals benefiting from positive environmental factors only benefited because they were already heritably intelligent and placed themselves in these environments to further and confirm their own intelligence.
@@b4u334 it's even more significant than that.
When you equalize chances of opportunity by a secured environment like yours (health system to prevent and treat diseases and traumas, plentiful and constant access to supply to eradicate undernutrition, compulsory participation in a free public school system to ensure good intellectual development and the assurance of acquiring the basic skills to participate in society, sanitary habits over everyone and especially children (no smoking, alcohol and drugs during pregnancy...) an so on...), it maximize consequently the expression of the genetic differences between people since practically no more environmental factors can interfere with people cognitive development.
@@blacksciencechocolate8984 Sure, but he didn't mention any of that in the video.
Get rid of the private schools is a good start.
@@aj010139 What in the world are you talking about? The schools where the culture, curriculum, rules, and discipline pump out better students?
When I was 11 and took an IQ test I scored 113. I also had a lot of difficult things I was going through: I grew up poor, in Foster homes and violent environments. When I turned 19 and my life was a little bit calmer I scored 143. It was very surprising so I had to take the test again. I got a 144! I hate telling people this cause I am a little embarrassed and don't like the silly associations that come along with such a result. Furthermore, I am in constant debate about the validity of these types of tests and what that really mean.
I think the disparity was due to my environmental factors changing: my life had gotten better, I was in college and I didn't have to worry or stress as much about immediate threats.
My mother is not very smart. I don't know what her intelligence is and it is hard to ascertain if her cognitive ability is diminished due to the stresses she grew up with (because she also grew up I'm Foster homes and had a tough upbringing , and it has really affected her mentally) or some genetic factors.
But hey I made it out of my predicament. Was able to travel and live all over the world and have great success up to this point. And I often wonder if that is due to my supposedly high I.Q., some resilience I gained from my harsh environment or was it a combination of convoluted luck and support from outsiders. Maybe a fusion of all those things.
But through my experience I do believe that our measure of success is due to how we react to each situation and the steps we take forward. Intelligence would help us parse out the paths that have higher possibilities for success. But also a myriad of other factors are in play; such as ones beyond our control, our ability to deal with stressors, etc.
"When I was 11 and took an IQ test I scored 113. I also had a lot of difficult things I was going through: I grew up poor, in Foster homes and violent environments. When I turned 19 and my life was a little bit calmer I scored 143. It was very surprising so I had to take the test again. I got a 144! " Stress and other factors will really affect the results so good job
@@friktogurg9242 thank you. 😀
AL: I would argue there is some merit in an IQ score but it is problematic. I came from a poor family and like you I was tested several times and the range was between 115 - 139. ( Real-world Intelligence? I'm somewhere in the top 90-95%) I quit High School and joined the NAVY, my education is largely informal (I read) and I am a lifetime student and critic of public education. Time and again I demonstrated problem-solving skills and earning capacity. There is no degree on my wall but I can hold my own in nearly any circle. My brothers too demonstrate above-average intelligence and we are retiring very comfortably in a Country Club minutes from the Gulf Coat of Fl. A few years ago a granddaughter called and asked about IQ. Her daughter scored a 128 and was placed in advanced classes. I chuckled and told her all is well. I am a GED $ millionaire, and one daughter is a GED multimillionaire, the granddaughter that phoned is also an HS dropout and she is well on the path to retiring before she is 40. She is drop-dead good-looking and wicked smart. Evidence genetics are at work. IMHO: I can teach an HS graduation class more in an afternoon about success than they likely heard the previous 3 years. The first lesson: Choose your company wisely! Cheers.
@@1Skeptik1 I also think habits and mindsets are extremely important. When it comes to hereditary traits, there is a genetic component; however, the characteristics we impart on others from our friends to family or even quick exchanges with strangers are immeasurably vital. And of course, how those people absorb and use what was imparted upon them, and vice versa.
There are some that seem to be born with some innate skill that affords them the ability to succeed even when the odds are stacked against them. And sometimes it can be perplexing when trying to figure out where that came from. Even how our brain develops in the womb has profound impact on us after we are born. For example if someone had more growth in their prefrontal cortex, it would most likely be easier for them to visualize scenarios than most people. And this could help them succeed in many areas, such as Mathematics; assuming they had a desire to learn it. Perhaps that aptitude would seem exceptional and cause people to believe they are of greater intelligence; however other areas of their brain may not have had as much development because of more growth in their prefrontal cortex; such as the Wernickes area, which consequently made language and speech more difficult for them...
I could go on and on and get more convoluted...just the subject of Intelligence is often times looked at in too simple of a manner. Intelligence and what affects it, how it can accurately be measured, what it really is, etc., is extremely complicated. And we still don't have a great understanding of what intelligence really is.
I would assert that the disparity might actually be more to do with your age. Just like how our physical body goes through a transformation and significant growth during puberty, I would assume our intelligence does as well. At least in my personal experience this seems to be true. Carefully looking back at my school years from 1st to 6th grade, I was, for the lack of a better term, quite dumb(relatively speaking). But the level of understand that I had during my class in the years that followed significantly increased along with my grade. I would catch the smallest of errors that teachers sometimes make or quite often corner some of them with a topical question that they couldn't answer then proceed to answer it for them. No significant environmental factors played part in this shift. Regardless, I am almost baffled that people would not consider intelligence to be primarily driven by genetics. When almost all physical traits rely on our genetic makeup, why would you assume that intellegence is something drastically different. Of course, the two shouldn't be lumped as an identical phenomenon and that any metaphysical truth dealing with the brain naturally implies a complexity that is yet to be discovered for the time being. But my main argument would be that the general direction in which intelligence is driven by genetics follows that of its physical counterpart. Well, I just realized that I'm meandering with this reply without giving much substantive argumentation but I am quite literally burning time at the moment so I will just leave it at that. Maybe I will take it a bit more serious and flesh out my arguments if anyone is willing to engage on this topic.
So right. I'm your basic poor Hispanic kid that was born with a high IQ. 138 and I did not get told about how smart o was just how good of an artist I was. Got older took on the piano then got older became a physics need. And now all i do is seek knowledge and understand emotions, people, art, philosophy, science all of it is now in my hands because of the internet. Peopld like us now have everything we need to learn. I thought I was weird all my life because I saw the world differently and felt others did not see it. Now I am a IT administrator all self taught from online. I make great money and have a girl that matches me. The jobs and knowledge are out there. We just have to fight for it.
Create your own work working for someone is just experience on a CV.
Just trying to see a pattern, were you always at the top of the school?
@vvlmm Amen!
Are you a member of mensa?
I'm mostly Spanish Jew and I am super smart outside of school and inside of school. But I don't care about being smart and arrogant, instead I want to be working towards be richer.
Stands to reason. Practically everything else about us is influenced in some way by genetics, so it would be strange if intelligence wasn't.
And: Intelligence testing is contentious "for some people" - a nice way of putting it.
Nobody cares... Because true intelligence lies in understanding genetics and human conciousness and then being able to modulate anyone, like making someone run as fast as bolt or play football as good as CR7 or be a 50linguial or be a great entrepreneur such as musk or be a great songwriter as sheeran or just anything without changing there basica conciousness:
But no one's smart enough to understand genetics and human conciousness
Hence proved we are jus worms suspended on the mercy of the physical universe
@@parimtmnitg2965 "Nobody cares"? Really?
You apparently don't - that's fine, but a lot of people (like myself) do.
@@ecurb10 You care because you're mentally fragile. Imagine needing affirmation that your so called genetic group is the most superior for intelligence. This is your own insecurity
A lot of the anger in this thread comes from an inability to handle nuance. Plomin says "intelligence has a genetic basis" and people assume that he is racist because one time someone that black people had inferior genetics.
Under no circumstances does that mean Plomin is racist. He's a scientist that is reporting some of the most robust statistics in psychology, which has been confirmed repeatedly through twin and adoption studies. The variance observed in intelligence between the races is widely believed by psychologists to be mostly accounted for by environmental factors, and I'm sure Plomin would be agree with their opinion.
Please actually think for yourself instead of becoming emotional and blindly reacting.
African Americans have a significantly lower socioeconomic status and SES has been correlated with intelligence. You are looking for any statement to confirm your racial bias. In no way did he say that there was no environmental factor...
I know you are not intelligent or educated enough to understand that correlation does not equal causation, and that is why it is hard to untangle genetic questions like this. There are certainly genetic differences between the races (e.g. skin color, prevalence of diseases), that does not mean you can attribute every observed phenotype to strictly genetic causes. There are epigenetic and environmental factors that affect gene transcription and translation, and the African American population suffers significant insult from their environments.
It is likely that there are genetic differences in intelligence between the races, but they are likely to be very small considering the short evolutionary timescale since they diverged. Please know your place and refrain from commenting when you don't know anything.
"People misunderstand what he says who are racist, therefore he is racist"
no.
"biology should apologize for the untold damage their discipline has done to humanity"
like every form of medication you have ever taken? Every medical treatment you have ever received?
Plomin doesn't even mention race one time in the video. There is no reason for you to come on hear and name-call everyone trying to participate in a discussion. I know you are confused and the world is a scary place, but try to settle that conflict internally.
that's worst than racist. it's classist and comically enough we should all be because according to his data...it's true|
these environmental factors do have an effect on the willingness to learn. but genetics are the basis indeed.
When scientists say "black people are less intelligent than whites or east Asians are more intelligent than whites", those who take it to mean that they are advocating genocide or slavery are the ones who are the problem. There are plenty of such people on both the left and the right.
Genetics are everything. Life is about having the best genes and competing for the mate with the best genes. If intelligence is an evolutionary adaptation that allowed us to thrive, why wouldn't intelligence be inheritable?
This is literally not true lmao. Did your genetics determine this stupid comment?
Matthew Jones it clearly determined yours and the fact that no one liked your comment shows you probably won’t be passing them onto the next generation you pathetic incel 😂😂😂
somehow nature has a wicked plan, seen too many cases of mental and physical issues if two high intellectual individuals mate.
Looks like a comment written by Hitler, you should be ashamed of writing this
Momo zzz it’s basic biology you Marxist.
I just finished his book entitled, , "blueprint: how DNA makes us who we are". It was very interesting. It helps to understand a bit about statistics because he makes countless references to certain statistical outcomes in the book. He is a proponent of using genetic data to begin to identify the heritable propensity for certain mental illnesses in order to improve upon historical psychiatric methods of diagnosis.
The book makes a lot of sense. But it also seems to show that even genetic testing can only go so far in explaining ALL of the variances in human behavior. But it can explain enough to make it worth doing.
thank you for sharing it!
The more complex a topic is, the more likely it is, that people only will find what they were looking for in the first place.
At 11:00 - if you remove all the environmental differences you're left with genetic differences....makes sense.
That's exactly what Jordan Peterson maintains with regard to gender difference.
Ethnic differences
@@bloomerboi21 Isn't that cultural? wouldn't that fall into the environmental category?
@@user-ip8bw7gt2x obviously, but genetics is the whole story.
@Adim Att But maybe it does.
If genetics determines all the other differences amongst living things, why wouldn't intelligence be included?
@Adim Att Why do you say that? Has research shown this?
1. Genetic potential is a factor in outcome
2. Genetic expression is what we do with the potential. This is easier to see and accept when we look at machines. I have a very powerful computer on my desk, i7 processor, maxed out RAM, etc. When working with large databases this helps me greatly. The programming or "code" determines the outcome to a larger extent in the quality of raw power. Most humans do not question and examine the code they are running.
3. Quality of outcome on a long time line comes down to examination of beliefs and actions and results. 30 years ago I was in a computer class, the hardware at that time was very slow... We had to turn off the calculations in the program and then run the program later when we wanted to see the outcome. (go get a coffee : ) MOST PEOPLE QUIT prior to hitting enter. Fat people can become thin, poor people can become wealthy, etc. It requires more effort. The exception is below the threshold of minimum level to play.
4. If the machine "crashes" before we get the answer due to a shortage of computing resources you never can get the answer... YES, some folks have a shortage of resources.
5. Have fun with what you have been given. Hack the program enjoy your life. Explore, Create, Grow.
6. The impossible just takes a little time longer : )
Your last paragraph hit it. That’s sounds more to wisdom! Having a high IQ don’t make you wise.
Genetics are one the biggest role to success, that's my personal opinion.
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4711841/ All this estimates are bullshit. No genetically reliable proof of heritability of IQ or (g). The only stidies that have high heritability estimates are environmentally confounded twin studies and ureliable GCTA datas. So no proof so fare for his arguments.
@@sounkoumahamanetoure4607 why deny reality? MZ twins raised apart have extremely similar IQs. Adopted siblings are no more similar in IQ than two strangers randomly selected off the street. People differ in general cognitive ability due to differences in brain structure, and genes build brains. None of this is controversial if you think about it for more than 10 seconds.
If genetics plays the largest role in intelligence, how can it be *your* opinion?
Noble Man I think charisma, confidence, and talents are more important and can get a person far.
@@paulreverend2315 true. A silver tongue will get you much farther in life than a masters degree
First we have to accept that genetics are the very reason that we are intelligent. Otherwise you could bring our cousins like chimpanzees or gorillas to our level by education which obviously fails. So our intelligence is the result of evolution and that requires a genetic component. Secondly the Flynn effect is most likely the result of the liberlization of education and career opportunities to the masses after hunderds of years in which you basically were stuck with the occupation of your ancestors. So there were very intelligent shoemakers who had no opportunity for education or career. This changed after WW2. Then we had a peak of people now freed and to search their place in live and to choose partners which were on their level. This produced more of intelligent offspring who themselves chose their opportunities. But this is obviously not meeting the rates from the first years.
Additionally, we need to take into account that better nutrition has followed the same curve. The brain is a very expensive organ from a nutritional point of view. Higher protein diets undoubtedly have had an effect, and have permitted individuals to maximize their biological inheritance. Also, over that same period, the average height has increased. Once again, showing the importance of nutritional improvements over time. Both brain growth and height have genetic limits. Good nutrition helps us to reach those limits.
In Communist Russia, back in the 1930s genetics (along with cybernetics) was a banned science, and geneticists were sent to GULAG death camps. It was not politically correct to say that genes exist or that genes play any role in human development, only the environment matters.
@@alexneigh7089 That's right. Genetics in the Soviet lefty shithole union would have destroyed all the myths and fakes claiming that races and ethnicities are all about the colour of skin. In Communist Russia interracial and interethnic marriages were pushed forward and mixed couples could get better jobs or promotion from the Party (hardly anybody would acknowledge that, but this was also the reality). So funny to see this happening again but to western world. I wonder how they ended up like this?:) In the USSR people had been brainwashed with the same Marxist propaganda till the fall of the country, never thought that Europeans and Americans would get into this shit.
The Flynn effect has nothing to do with Liberalism. It's nutrition, medicine, and literacy. The Chinese, despite living in a totalitarian 1984-esque state where millions toil like robots in sweatshops, experience the Flynn effect just the same.
There is a 100% overlap between people who argue against this and people who associate being “smart” with being “good.”
They want to think “dumb people” are “bad people.” So they must CHOOSE to be “dumb.”
Meanwhile, I have a kid with a (clearly inherited) reading disability. She’s sweet and loving, loyal and good at her job at a bakery. She didn’t CHOOSE to have a hard time reading. Her sister is a straight-A, honours student.
Stop associating intelligence with “moral value” and it becomes much easier to understand that genes really do determine school success.
SlypherSpoons That’s a very good point.
Mortality also has a genetic component.
*Morality.
@@DaveWard-xc7vd I didn't say anything about mortality.
@@tanzeel6387
Typo. I meant morality.
There is a strong correlation between low IQ and criminal behavior.
Genetics is a very important issue for people worldwide..
Some Environments are better for some persons... This why family is So important!
Not everyone has a good family. In fact I'd argue most of us don't.
@Mister Meeseeks
Atheists don’t believe that
@Mister Meeseeks
Atheists don´t believe families are the cells of society
@Mister Meeseeks
Atheists believe in the supernatural. Most of the Atheists believe in aliens in spite of having zero evidence of their existence
@@ajarivas72 I'm atheist and I think families are essential to raise kids who are less anti-social
This man is purposely speaking in a way to not get this video censored. You know if he was to speak plainly this video would be removed.
Why would this excellent presentation of empirical scientific facts possibly be censored?
@@denniscliff2071 Because of the heritability emphasis. This obviously extends to different groups who on average test differently on IQ tests. The accepted explanation in academia for social differences nowadays is social conditioning.
@@denniscliff2071 because it runs against the current post-modern ideology, which denies difference among people's abilities (while at the same time claiming to embrace diversity).
@shadow inc True but we're talking about perceptions here, not facts.
@shadow inc If i am understanding you correctly, the variance in IQ between groups (races), is the variance between average IQ scores in those groups. An average IQ score of 72 in one group compared to that of 100 in another group may not seem significant but it is hugely significant in that the one group cannot be trained to perform the simplest task compared to the 100 average IQ group. A person needs an IQ of at least 120 to be able to understand engineering principles. People who are two or three standard deviations above average are responsible for modern technology, science, medicine, and all aspects of advanced civilization. These people are in an extreme minority and without them we would still be hunting and gathering and depending on sharp sticks to survive.
Surely this guy has been blessed by his ancestor's genetics, in body and mind.
Life is extremely unfair. I've lost the genetic lottery in almost every part that is related to being more financially successful
@@Ivan-vw1bw 😂
I have noticed that people with high general intelligence are healthier, good at many sports, and demonstrate higher moral and aesthetic sensibility. Also, people of mixed race who grew up in various environments (e.g. different countries) are often more adaptable, creative, and socially aware.
I remember this kid in class. Both his mother and father were doctors. I was constantly amazed how fast he picked up anything. One might think well he had resources, his parents made good money. But there was more to it. We were presented something new, no way even he heard or knew about it. He picked up faster than any of us. -- And of course, he became a doctor too, just like his parents lol....
My mother couldn’t even grasp the most basic multiplication, nor did she in her 30+ years in America, managed to learn how to string two English sentences together. I live with the anxiety of knowing that there may be, because of her low intelligence, a natural limit to what I can learn.
@@oneldelorbe1413 I heard this from a talk show host. When we are born we are given a bunch of cards (meaning talents) then we have to play those cards. You have talent in other way, just find them and use them.
@@oneldelorbe1413 What about your father?
being born with a low iq is a curse. Especially when the fields you like require a high iq. Being doomed to work a shitty job because the happenstance of an egg and sperm fusing is torture. It should be illigal to have kids without being 100% sure that their genes wont make them dumb, unmotivated or neurotic. If it ever were to become possible id love to gene edit myself out of this living hell.
Look at the bright side, if you managed to figure out all you said here, your IQ is not as low as you might think.
Same here. I'll a walking advert for genetic engineering, and what happens when mediocre people reproduce.
@@catherinebirch2399We actually need all types of people not just high IQ people.
None of us are doomed. There are plenty of people that are mediocre in intelligence tests, but are happy and productive members of society. You can do a lot to improve your lot in life.
Conversely, there are a lot of highly intelligent people that aren’t necessarily happier or contributing more to society. There are also traits like creativity and moral intelligence that are harder to measure, but matter even more.
If society is getting more intelligent, then why are we as a species more unhappy than ever? Maybe it’s less about standardly measured intelligence and more about personality traits that make us happier and contribute to the happiness of others in society.
Until we get supercheap robots powered by supercheap electricity, we’re still going to need people to do things like pick fruit, sweep floors and wash dishes.
Especially in countries where people seem to be incapable of maintaining any type of mechanical equipment and that would include robots. 😮
Yes. This is a real scientist talking.
Hes not a scientist. Hes a psychologist
@@w.gabrielselassiei6139
nope [Robert J. Plomin, FBA (born 1948) is an American psychologist and geneticist best known for his work in twin studies and behavior genetics.]
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Plomin
@@jibraan123100 stop throwing around left wing buzzwords and add some substance to the opposition
@@jibraan123100 If I didn't look into comment section, I wouldn't know that this video has anything to do with the right or left views.
@@w.gabrielselassiei6139 So if one has a PhD in psychology and genetics it means they are not a scientist? What exactly is a scientist in your mind?
A very good point that intelligent people will tend to seek other intelligent people/environments. This will again further their collective intelligence. If we find that our environment lack the stimulus that we seek, we will change it. However i do believe that we have different kinds of intelligence e.g Math, Social etc. Meaning that the intelligent problem solvers will tend to seek more difficult math/problems to solve, while emotional intelligent people will tend to seek out more complex, and interesting people, perhaps challenging their point of view.
I agree 100% with you!
yess I see this all the time irl
I am very struck by your comment and I agree with the fact that people are guided by the search for environments that are related to their type of dominant intelligence.
Formal IQ tests are broken down in to different components. So, the things you wanted are assessed on IQ tests. A person may do better at a certain set of skills and not as well on a formal IQ test. Also, there has never been any objective data compiled to study "emotional intelligence."
Could motivation to learn be a factor? Some people don't really care about learning, some are insatiable learners. But is there a limit to what someone is able to learn, even if they really want to learn it?
Great questions! Individual intrinsic vs. extrinsic motivations I'm sure plays a part.
There is a study that mentioned that people with higher IQs are insatiable leaners and will find new things to learn causing some to make discoveries
Motivation is not cause, its the effect.
I believe there is a limit in learning. When you hit the limit you can still learn new things but you start to forget older things.
There is a limit to how much data the brain can store.
Certain dog breeds are more intelligent than others.
Created by eugenics
My Muzzer how DARE you spread truth online!
That's because of socioeconomic factors, though.
@@happybureaucrat1311 Yes. Richer dogs have better trainers, or something.
@Roy Rogers so you're acknowledging that certain breeds are more intelligent than others? That genetics play a role?
Genetics determines how you start, not how you finish. You may learn quickly but with the wrong attitude you will not go far. You may learn slowly, but with the right mindset your compound knowledge will take you far. This has been proven by neuroscientists. The brain may not physically grow, its connections does, improving your intellectual capacity.
To an extent. Self discipline is probably heritable. Social skills and success can at times mean more. The unabomber was very smart. Not to successful. Just a thought.
All personality traits are mostly heritable.
Exactly my thoughts 👏🏼
Keep coping boyo
Background and talent are everything, so stop.
I have a hypothesis. A common theme is that human DNA is highly regulated; a lot of non-coding DNA is regulatory DNA. As we age, we experience increasing amount of environmental influences that increasingly favorably regulate inherited intelligence DNA leading to an increasing contribution of genetics to our intelligence. This could explain the increasing influence of genetics on intelligence as we age.
"increasing amount of environmental influences that increasingly favorably regulate inherited intelligence DNA leading to an increasing contribution of genetics to our intelligence" can you explain this part
doesnt higher invironmental influence impact who we are even more than less invironmental influence ?
Being smart is a curse
You see all the shortcomings of the world and the people and you cant really do anything about it except lose your mind
You're watching too many movies.
Nah it’s pretty good you can just pursue what you desire after you take care of the financial stuff
Yeah, I recently switched to enjoying see the world of the human animals burn. They deserve it, and we deserve the show.
@@VitaSineLibertatenih Nah you and humanity kinda deserves nothing
I like how everybody in this comment section think they are intelligent XD
I may need to watch this several times..
Actually the average IQ seems to be going down nowadays; and different groups definitely have different IQs.
maybe because iq is not intelligence
The teacher could identify the intelligent student from low and middle income parents, remove the student from the classroom, and place the student in a high quality independent study program. This works because it worked for me. Individualized education with independent study for intelligent students works, and can democratize education.
The can’t do that! It would mean you’d actually get educated and not indoctrinated
To end world poverty we have to understand human prosperity which means we need to understand human differences which means we need to end society's taboo. Debate on human differences isn't hate! It's an important part of science!
I'm from a third world country where and I completely agree with you.
I would like to practice eugenics in a global scale.
What does it mean 'to end society's taboos'? If you're saying that somehow a BTS member breeds with a black girl is going to cause indifferences and ends world poverty then why is it that in developing world countries where many people are of the same culture and have no indifferences live in poverty ? For example the Maya people live in huge poverty and crime rates so high?
I wonder how good are any types of IQ tests mentioned here, if the outcome can be effected with small things like what person ate for breakfast, his financial situation, how much sleep he/she had, etc... So many biological factors.
I can answer how good IQ tests are.
No other test has EVER been invented that comes within a standard deviation. This is the gold standard. Nothing on earth comes close.
Every low IQ human/race/nation has attempted to discredit IQ and create a new test that does not put them at the bottom. The USSR worked on this with 1,000s of "scientists" and Russia still is working on this.
When you talk shit about the quality of IQ tests you are showing your willful ignorance.
Every military on earth worth it salt uses IQ as its #1 sorting tool.
Very little correlation as iq tests are designed in a way that those factors won't make much difference
The outcome of an IQ test is rock solid, with only about +- 2 points of difference for the things you mentioned. Your concerns are a classic sign of slightly lower intelligence, because if you worry that you might not be adequate for a task, let's say coding, it usually means you aren't. People who code complex algorithms fast and efficient while doing the required math and mental rotations in their head effortlessly, they know they are adequate, they can feel their own understanding. You will never see those people being worried about their own IQ - their IQ allows them to know they have a high IQ
@@LjosiI took several intelligence tests on Google, and I took 114 places, another 66, another 140, and another 120. It's a terrible difference How can I know the correct one?
@@abdogames5975 those are not real IQ tests. Online tests are scams, even just falling for those scams reveals you have a lower IQ. Any reasonable person knows that only government administered IQ tests taken under timed supervision are legit (military, employment office, psychiatrist,..)
Thanks a lot ! We appreciate the effort from all of you. We are grateful for bringing most knowledgeable people to explain and share information.
One of the reasons all people never have been nor ever will be 'equal'.
Equal can be defined in different ways. For example, equal treatment under the law of the 14th amendment.
@@AdrienLegendre Equal treatment under the law should be a basic standard of fairness in a civilized society.
No one argues with this. You however can not legislate equal outcomes.
9:08 I have heard-tell that bad halogens like bromine have been added to table salt as a replacement for iodine. I would like more information on this because apparently not only did adding iodine to table salt in 1925 reduce iodine deficiency, it apparently increased general IQs as well. If iodine levels in table salt have been removed or significantly reduced, would this have caused the recent tapering of general IQs?
Interesting!!
Does this mean that if someone is extremely verbally intelligent, they could’ve been equally spatially intelligent if they had developed that ability as much? Are there any genes that are just good for one intelligence but not the other?
he just said there's a correlation (known as "G") between all the categories. It just means that a person with high verbal intelligence is going to have a proportionately high spatial intelligence. For example if you had a verbal score of 7/10 then you wouldn't have a spatial skill of 1/10, it's going to be something closer to 7 like 5.
No, it just means they are likely to be beter than most people
there is a tendency which supports your question, it´s the g-factor if intelligence. The thing is that this factor mostly influences the speed we process different categories of tasks. If you see me doing a math problem I have never seen before ten times faster than the average person, you can expect me to be able to create a verbal rhyme at least 5 times faster than average.
But concerning the giftednes in the specific subjects, we do see the pattern of multiple intelligences. Many people who are able to talk almost like Goethe concerning their verbal CREATIVITY often cannot solve most university level math problems even after hundreds of hours of hard study.
Summary: So, concerning processing speed we have a universal intelligence but concernig originality we can proof Gardener´s multiple intelligence hypothisis. (Meaning a fast person in English will be fast in maths as long as we are only talking about processing what is already there. As soon as we enter problem solving land, people differ most often in their ability to excell in the relevant endavour)
Very pleasant voice
Thank you for supporting G.
The multiple intelligence theory is bogus.
@St. Longinus
Hmmmm.
@Kent Horvath
Nope.
ua-cam.com/video/6cClRgjL-nM/v-deo.html
@Kent Horvath There is absolutely 0 evidence for multiple intelligences. Personality or physical abilities aren't intelligences, and all of that variability in ability is already explained by the general factor of intelligence.
Kent Horvath I have a bachelors in psychology. The Multiple intelligences hypothesis has never seriously been replicated in any study, it’s nonsense.
@Kent Horvath I can read studies, as can anyone else.
If you can link me even one study on multiple intelligences and a working neurological model that replicates, but you won't because there aren't any.
"INTELLIGENCE IS DEFINITELY GENETICAL!, AND BIOLOGICAL!"
no
@@sacha_mskyCope, equality dont exist
What does he mean when he says heritability increases or changes? Is he defining heritability as something different than inherited traits? Also, I noticed his comment about stopping people from passing their wealth onto their children. That one will go over quite well.
@SlypherSpoons Thank you; so it maybe something of a progressive trait. Interesting.
I believe he means that, as environmental differences are reduced, genetic differences become even more significant in their effect on measurable long-term performance.
@@hermes_logios Thanks!
Very intriguing topic. However, I am cautious when I hear the phrase "we find ......" without knowing how they found it. Always necessary to know.
maybe through a standard model of data and graphs of IQ tests of a variety of people ? Idk bruh they probably just came out with random s
@@lingzhao5719 maybe
Recent DNA studies have identified specific distinct DNA variations called single nucleotide polymorphisms, (SNP) linked to IQ. The challenge is that by examining a million humans about > 1000 DNA variations have been found that explain only about 10% of human intelligence. This means much more work needs to be done to explain all of genetic influence on intelligence. Each genetic variation explains a tiny amount of intelligence, e.g. 1 DNA variation = 0.05 IQ point. The biology is complex and the statistics are complex.
The research isnt racist.....those shouting racism are biased.
@@nollhypotes Please read Wikipedia page on Plomin, he does believe in differences in average is between different human populations to be at least partially genetic in origin.
You can argue whether he's right or wrong on that, but that's what he believes
@@nollhypotes Well, then, I didn't understand it that way, but Plomin might have simply contradicted the other things Plomin has said during his career.
He is one of the people who signed these conclusions:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mainstream_Science_on_Intelligence
Please read every single paragraph of it, especially the last ones. They specifically address the racial and specifically mean group difference.
Again, you can argue whether he is wrong about it or not, but this is what he believes in as well as many other scientists "left" from him, i.e. the ones more on the environmental side of things, like, say, James Flynn do.
Furrowed Brow the conclusions may be racist, but blame nature for that. There does appear to be disparities in intelligence between the different races, and these disparities are likely to be the result of genes. However, that doesn't become an argument to judge individuals based on their race. Exceptions obviously do exist.
Tobias F citation for what? I'm not stating a fact but rather my conclusion. You should've asked me to provide reasons why I came to my conclusion. And what exactly is the evidence for the disparities being environmental?
Tobias F for one, I have yet to see any evidence for intelligence being influenced by the environment. Never have I come across specifics. If you can provide me with scientific, peer-reviewed studies that specify the environmental component(s) that adversely affect intelligence, I will be happy to be more open-minded. "The environment plays a role" isn't adequate enough for me. I need to know what specific components of the environment have been unequivocally shown to adversely affect intelligence. My default position must be what is existential rather than hypothetical. We have found genes responsible for intelligence. Thus, I am compelled to believed what is clearly proven and well-developed
It should have been named C.A. (cognitive ability) because the word intelligence has such a strong colloquial meaning.
Right...then the dumb people wouldnt even be offended lol
So so strong is the colloquial meaning you want to start changing words that mean specific things in the science community? Sounds like a great plan 😃😃😃😃😃
"Heritability increases with equal environments" (11:20) I never actually thought about the gene x environment theory in this way - but it does make you wonder.... the whole equality of opportunity debate is centered around the fact that we will become more equal regarding socioeconomic measures but what if we instead actually cause a greater divide between people?
Say that we construct an environment in which we think we best cultivate intelligence based on previous observations (how does the environment look in families where brilliant kids are raised? how does the school environment look? etc). That environment would not be the best environment for everyone - it would be a highly specialised environment where people with high cognitive ability excel, leaving people of average or low cognitive ability even further behind. Maybe what we call "equality of opportunity" isn't equality of opportunity at all, but indeed a highly specialised environment where we put even more emphasis on heritage than before, giving a certain group of the population an enormous advantage?
So in other words, as long as low-intelligence races exist in a society, it will hold them back from achieving a society where intelligence is cultivated and valued and where human potential and technology will be advanced. Sounds like an argument against multiculturalism to me
Interesting. So at the end, this guy is saying that in a perfectly fair world with no discrimination, the measured heritability of iq would be extremely high
It's only natural that removing other factors which influence [thing] would cause the remaining factor that influences [thing] to stand out more. If one removed all non-genetic factors which affect IQ, genetic factors would be responsible for all remaining variation. Likewise, if one kept society unequal but somehow ensured that everyone was genetically identical in all relevant ways, social factors would become responsible for all remaining variation.
Discourse around IQ is shot through with the nature vs nurture fallacy. The truth is that all observed behaviors are always 100% genetic and 100% environmental. They are how that organism responded to that environment. Change genetics or environment in the right way, and the result will have been different.
The next revolution will be the dumb vs the clever. Instead of 'power to the proletarians!' it will be 'power to the stupids!'.
ThePuppyTurtle love this response.
Nobody cares... Because true intelligence lies in understanding genetics and human conciousness and then being able to modulate anyone, like making someone run as fast as bolt or play football as good as CR7 or be a 50linguial or be a great entrepreneur such as musk or be a great songwriter as sheeran or just anything without changing there basica conciousness:
But no one's smart enough to understand genetics and human conciousness
Hence proved we are jus worms suspended on the mercy of the physical universe
He never said that
id be nice if people put the scientific sources in the description.. /:
you should be nice regardless
Jared Young i think he meant to say "it'd"
he wrote a book on it
A bit on the lazy side?
It is so easy to search the sources.
@@solobackpacking I've tried hard, could you do it for me? Or tell me what I'd search for?
so what does this mean if theres a 15 point gap between racial groups? could it be that wealth gaps have little to do with racism and in large part are genetic?
@ThatBadGuy you can't definitively say that, but it's plausible.
Zimbabwe, and now South Africa. Why the fk they do not prosper? Maybe because they got rid of the white oppressors?
@@alexneigh7089 Actually there are African countries that are now showing great progress. Try looking at this very hopeful video. ua-cam.com/video/fRsFT11CxSk/v-deo.html
ooDirtyMickoo At least you don’t deny the possibility of it being true.
@@joanblond8527 Than you for the link. I am trying to figure out what is their secret. My version: they were lucky with their president (and his son), and they are blessed with natural resources. I am glad they appear to have made it with their $18K GDP per capita, and I hope they will keep the good thing going.
Actually it could go either way. He predicted that if we got rid of family advantages then heritability (as a percentage of variation) would increase because environmental factors would decrease. But if iq is genetic then smart families can give advantages, maybe such large advantages(to people who are on average smarter) that they overshadow luck and chance and magnify outcomes by iq.
Good video Dr. Plomin!!! I love videos on IQ.
My cat can smell better than me.
My cat can hear better than me.
Every single sociologist: "Intelligence has nothing to do with genetics. IQ differences are down to social differences and environment. It's not inheritable."
An actual geneticist: "Intelligence is inheritable."
Is this actually a widespread belief among sociologists? Do you know a lot of them, are in a related field or somthing?
@@petarivanovic2297 Yes.
Heritability is not the same as 'inherited'.
Well I'm a sociologist and I beg to disagree. We do take biological factors into account whenever they meaningfully contribute to subject of the research, but the thing is, genetic influence on intelligence is outside our field of expertise and is still debated on in gene scientist circles, and as such we still operate on assumption that genetic influence is negligible.
Heritability means "some kind of genetic component". He said in the video that at most 50% of our intelligence is explained by genetics. Which leaves the other 50% down to environmental factors like education, nutrition etc.
I knew it,🤨it all makes sense now, 10 years in college to get an associate degree in math and science 😩 2.3 GPA😭... it’s my parents fault 😡
Yes, your parents gave you bad genetics and expect you to get A+.
@@bloomerboi21 I thought I was doing something wrong, I remember I would study from dusk to dawn and understand the material, then everything would mix in my head... 10 years in college, then 2 years in UTI, then back in school for water distribution, you can't tell me I'm not trying... you know what your right, I'm like a duck, I can fly, swim, and walk, I might not be the best at any, but I know how to do it... also my dad is schizo and my mom suffers from depression so, I have to keep close attention to my own sanity.
Thank you for your may or may not sarcastic comment? "it really got me thinking"
Don't blame your parents because they didn't mean it. Intelligence isn't everything. The most important thing is to enjoy life and do what makes you happy.
@@mimigigi1061 and that is exactly what I'm doing.😃... I study to know, not to make money... I married a business person so I can use my free time to help my community. I worry about the environment so try to come up with ways I can help, then raise awareness.🙃... Plus I'm on meds that help me with my general depression so...that helps a lot.
Your depression can have an impact on your performance
UA-cam Stazi thought police censorship incoming in 3..2..1..
TimmacTR ???
You know...for once - from a teleological perspective at least - I'd say YT would do the right thing by censoring Robert Pomin out of the fucking internet. I really like him as a speaker and I believe to everything he says but I think no one understands the shitstorm this is going to raise 10 years from now.
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4711841/ Or thr guy is just wrong all the long. The only plausible datas for his genetic argument are environmentaly confounded twin studies. And since the assumptions for twin studies calculation(the Equal Environment Assumption) are obviously false, his point argument his without basis.
Aren't twin studies about "same genetic makeup, different environment, similar outcome"?! I don't get what you're trying to say...
I am thinking that people are less intelligent now when I see social media posts- haha. I don’t have a high intelligence according to genetic markers yet I was able to achieve many of those things associated with high intelligence. Some markers on the DNA sequence seem to suggest that some people with higher brain volume are able to learn and analyze things differently. While in school I remember being put in average classes and thought for some reason I might be smarter than the people around me- haha. When it came to a class in geometry - I recall failing my first test and thought wait a minute - I think I’m smarter than this. I took the book home kept rereading and taking the practice tests in the back of the book (this is before the computer age) and voila next test I received an A. I had to ignore the situations at home that were pressing on me as a teenager- i.e. difficult bipolar mom. I am a senior and I am still interested in learning - I am learning a new language and it’s been very rewarding. This man is very intelligent.
This is why Forrest Gump was worried about his son inheriting his genes. :P
TBH I always assumed Forrest simply had fetal alcohol syndrome
Both nature and nurture would help a lot in learning.
Nurture has done its part, as Plomin said. Now it is nature's turn.
Nature of nurture 😁
@@alexneigh7089 well said
Just to clarify he states that the environment we choose is based on genetics, correct?
No he says we start off with a small difference in IQ between individuals and that this has a heightened disparity over time (especially during childhood). He then suggests that this small difference in IQ guides us to stimulating environments, that are in layman's terms deemed as 'intelligent'. Like a positive feedback loop our intelligence is able to get to full capacity if the environment is optimal. This in turn has an effect on the environment we're in (more stimulating), and the way people perceive us, and, our motivations and positive associations with difficult problem solving. All of which in turn manifest itself in a higher ability to problem solve.
@@Sophia-ec5uy LOL
@Zach cash mate I'm doing a BSC in psychology and my understanding is pretty good
@Zach cash An issue with the studies is that they're mostly twin studies so assume that the twins have the same environments, which isn't necessarily the case especially for monozygotic twins as they may be different genders and in turn, this assumption poses issues for the research methodology/ validity. Also, the genome studies and twin studies are based on associations (correlations/ regressions) of phenotypes (e.g I. Q) with genetic similarities so can't directly suggest cause. At the moment it's suggested about 60% of your intelligence is genetically based and all this is through something called additive dominance which is where genes basically have a small effect but add up to create one phenotype (being smart/not so smart).
I love plomin, and I'm not saying intelligence doesn't have a large genetic element - but we can't discount how our environment shapes our genetics too (take a look at epigentics v interesting). I was just trying to explain a particular element of what he said in a way that I think was pretty accurate
@Zach cash so I suppose yes, in a way he's proposing that if we're naturally a bit smarter we seek out stimulating environments and this makes us even more smart in the long run due a snowball effect
But this particular idea is just a theory
And it has little empirical evidence
Wish he would've gone into the hypothesis that heritability correlates higher over time because the brain is more fluid when you're younger and genetics have a higher impact than we'd like to admit.
I think it more the case that throughout your life the environmental effect starts balancing itself out (in terms of positive/negative influence)
what do you mean ? it cant balance itself from the start ? what does my age has to do with it @@alexdunphy3716
Note the general intelligence is most closely tied to verbal intelligence, particularly the ability to perform well on analogy questions. Next down the line are the following verbal elements: vocabulary, reading comprehension and then grammar and syntax (to which sentence completion questions relate).
Hilariously I think they took analogies out of the SATs (if i remember correctly)
I am suspicious about what we know about environmental vs genetic heritability. One thing I never see addressed is that individuals can get very different IQ scores taking the test at different times in the same few years, and whole groups can get wildly lower scores when they are under stress. This has been shown with seasonal workers. We also know that simply being in a lower social caste or class affects the brain by being either a long time lower ranked member of society. It's possible that many of our ancestors didn't experience that, because much social stratification in pre-history was cyclical or temporary.
So it's similar to our job interest as Jordan Peterson points out that in society with more equal opportunity those genetic tendencies related to choosing job path are more visible and man tend to choose more masculine jobs and women more feminine jobs.
People's backgrounds, educations and experiences are different across the board. Is there a study that shows IQ test results of people of different races of the same age who all had the same educational background and got the same grades in school?
After a long time some dense information. Thanks.
How about attention deficit disorder or learning slow or memory problems
I read a lot - nearly a book a day. Plomin's book was the best book I read last year.
Mr Men books don’t count
@@summerrr1
I take it that this is some kind of insult. I had to look up Mr. Men. I'm still unclear as to what it is. I met a guy when I was in the army who read five books a day. It's mostly justly a function of how many hours a day you read.
I do read some small books. I read the Osprey Duel books (tanks and planes) and they are quite short. But I also read some full length non-fiction books like this one. This year the best such book I've read is by Charles Murray.
3:56 Yet even the other 50% that is attributed to the environment is also of a genetic nature in the overwhelming number of cases because our environment is modeled by people who are in most cases genetically similar to ourselves, starting with our parents.
So in my opinion g is 100% genetically determined.
@vvlmm I think even truer in metropolis because they are a true product of the DNA of their inhabitants.
indeed, genetics and education are the same if it is both given by your parents. But to know if the parents have a true impact on the intelligence of their childrens, we first have to know if intelligence is heritable. Once we know that, we can say what make a person. If intelligence is educational, then we have the possibility to re-educate ourselves and we can better understand why we are unable to do things that we thought were impossible to do because of who we are. And i dont trust scientific studies that talk about intelligence, especially when the guy seem confident about it and keep spitting words and words but no "?"
Flynn effect? What I have noticed is a drop in ability to read , write, do math and complete in society. Due to reduced education and loss of interest.
We are adapting to a world that we don’t need to struggle as much as before.
Your observations agree with the science. If you google the Flynn effect you'll find it has been going reverse for several decades - we are becoming dumber.
@@hwfq34fajw9foiffawdiufhuaiwfhw It's across all Western nations. IQ peeked for those born in 1974 and has been declining since. Those born after that date faced easier exams in an effort to increase the numbers going to university. When they were being pushed, it affected everyone, even those who didn't go on to university. IQ is now 3% lower than it once was.
In school genetics play a big role,the holy grail of genetics is people being able to improve their intelligence through genetic modification,academic performance and creativity will improve drastically
education is extremly impactful, as big impact as you think genetics are. Motivation, role model, safety feeling. All of this literally determine how much a person is going to try and get interested at school
IQ is like height. It's genetic with a smaller environmental factor. A person whose genetics says 6'4" can grow up to be 6'2" with poor nutrition. But they will never grow up to be 5'6" and vice versa. Genetics sets a small window for what you are. Environment can only help you maximize within that small range.
how do you explain asian peoples coming to europe and suddenty getting taller than white peoples themselves. I have miultiples white / asian mixed friends that are taller than me. And im not small, my dad was 6.2 foot
I'm verry clever and have a hih IQ. My mum is super proud with me.
His last point is very interesting. If we were to maximize the environmental effects for each person; that is, give each person all of the education, social benefits, etc. that he/she could benefit from, we would still have intellectual differences, but now those differences would be based entirely upon people's genetics. Heritability would then be very high. There is no way to homogenize the population's intellectual abilities. As it stands now, we can rationalize away intellectual differences by attributing those to differences in experiences and opportunity. How would people feel about themselves and others if they were forced to recognize that those differences where based entirely upon their genetic endowments? There would be nowhere to hide from that reality.
the most intelligent comment. You understand the video.
We all know what would happen, don't we
Agreed
Clinical psychology is guilty of navel-gazing. There's too much orthodoxy and all this talk about statistics hides the fact that the so-called predictability isn't nearly as real as purported. "80%" in statistics is not a predictive factor; it's the characteristic of a log-normal distribution. Also, the Flynn effect is a ridiculous fluke of metrics: By that model our ancestors 25 generations ago would be complete retards, which they weren't. Plomlin talks about science but clinical psychology's methods are far from being reliable. My problem is not that they're on a path to doing science; my problem is that they claim theirs is already is an evidence-based scientific domain. Far from it.
I recommend you read about the genome wide association studies of IQ.
What i heard by education not taking science into account is they dont want to use their political and personal beliefs ground
It seems to me that if the heritability of (g) increases with the age of the person, intelligence not likely to be related to environment. This would make sense, of course, as there's a mechanism (alleles) for the formation of the brain, but no known environmental influence on its formation _in utero._
What he says at 11:21 is the same Jordan Peterson says about differences in temperament and interests between men and women in countries where more gender equality politics have been applied. In other words, when you make the environment equal you magnify biological differences.
If you're giving a recorded-presentation like this and aggregating the findings of "many scientific studies" as unquestionable fact, you need to provide sources for those claims. There are none linked under the video, and there are none in the "read the text version here" link.
You present some interesting ideas, very eloquently. Some quite well-reasoned, some displaying logical fallacies (to greater or lesser extent). I'm inclined to agree with most of what you said. But the conclusions you're drawing here are, as you state them, rooted solidly (not conceptually) in scientific studies - since you're using those studies as _direct evidence,_ you need to source those studies so we can individually assess their context, their scope, their limitations, etc. before we just take your word for them.
Lots of words to say you deny genetics.
Race equality is the greatest lie ever told.
Barry O'Connor this man never brought up race. Are you reading something into this video the rest of us are not?
But it is ultimately for good
@@karthikeyanm.v8381 APPARENTLY not...
It is not a lie, it is part of the 14th amendment to the constitution, equal treatment under the law.
@@karthikeyanm.v8381No, because equality only exists when you level down,
interesting and expected that at least some of our intelligence is inherited. While some is from our environment. So, what do you do with that between maximizing human potential and freedom to parent as you see fit?
I saw somewhere that you can reach between 5'10 and 6'1 with the same genes,
by diet. e.g. eat foods when you are still growing that stimulate growth hormones.
I think the range is actually much larger that.
Not possible if you dont have the genes
Yeah tell that to a Filipino boy with 2 parents 5'2 & under. That kid will never grow to be 5"10 even if he eats a cow every day 🤭
Where did you read this? What sources did the author cite to support their claim?
The wild thing about doing two dna tests and getting high depression and bipolar, my sons autistic but comes up gifted with circleDNA and intelligent is 95% with nebula DNA , but he’s limited in life. I think even though I suffered some of the same I used my intelligence to fight through.
None of this is created equal
Very interesting. That's actually going to be the next thing I look into; intelligence/genetic effect on mental health and behavioral issues.
True scientists who rigorously apply the scientific method have long understood that the Polish are the world's most genetically-intelligent people.
@T.L. Watkinson 😉
Actually, decades of rigorous testing shows that the Finns are the world’s smartest people.
@@leeb.7188 👍😉
@@leojanuszewski1019 : But the Poles are a very close second! 😎
@@leeb.7188 Well thank you. And the Finns have MUCH to be proud of!
But wait, how do we know what kind of early mental stimulation one child benefited from over another child? Which child's house was full of books? Which child had a full time mother/father? Which had parents who took an active interest in their education? How do we know which child's diet was nutritionally rich, and which child was malnourished? I could go on and on with this. There are so many hidden factors involved in a person's development that it seems somewhat foolish to put it down to genetics.
Genetics indicate potential. Achieving that potential depends on the factors you mention. (As well as many other factors.) It’s both.
You don't understand the measurement methodology.
The factors that you described aren't as hidden as you think they are. Plus, parents with higher intelligence will be able to read to their children and generally provide a better environment to foster their child's physical, educational, a d psychological growth.
This makes complete sense and I have realized this a long time ago. I am not a scientist.
wow you must be a genius
@@davidgabriel5125 , 🤓
@@jgrob64906 lol
@@lingzhao5719 😁
Intelligence test - middle class people testing how middle class subjects are.
Education is cope. Intelligence is mostly genetics.
Says the guy who believes in satan.
I think that increased inheritability with age is mostly due to the fact that only by age of (roughly) 25 the brain developes fully. So measuring intelligence of not yet developed brain is like measuring the speed of car that is not finished. And it is not surprising that adults of the age 25+ show more than 80% heritability of IQ.
The analogy doesnt explain the percentage change at all. It only explains why measuring iq at the age of 25 ist the most accurate. The question is why the build plan of the car changes with age.
@@Alex-bl8uh it does. The build plan doesn't change, the performance does.
Also i don' think you understood what i was talking about. The measurement is accurate across the age, not just at age of 25, the heritability increases till age 25 and then stays the same.
That's why IQ tests are calibrated to specific age groups. The relative ranking of IQ remains the same. A child who has a higher IQ compared to his/her classmates at age 7 will tend to have a higher IQ compared to those same classmates at age 37.
@@nonono4160 The problem solving skill of someone with high IQ is very likely to be well above average. This ability is there at a very young age, kid who is very smart will find more creative ways to build lego blocks, another will perhaps be able to create a few pieces of a puzzle with a piece of carton, and coloured pencil if a puzzle stored somewhere isn't complete.
This problem solving skill will enable to solve more difficult problems later in life, for example some people can detect signs that something serious is causing their health issues and seek help at stage 1-2 of cancer whereas others are less fortunate and get a correct diagnosis at stage 4.
Heritability on the other hand increases steadily. A gifted person at 25 will perhaps regularly lose arguments with a professor 20 years older than him, but at 35 will be able to give a better account of himself with the same professor, because he has read more, has had more verbal duels with his peers, and his mind is more adept at forming thoughts that enables him to focus on the matter being discussed and quickly come up with counter offensives to whatever the professor throws at him. That's why a 50 year old person with an IQ of 135 will be a better CEO than he would have been at 25.
@@redshift8302 the thing i was talking about was the fact that the measurement of IQ showed that the degree of heritability was growing with age untill teh age of around 25 (which conincidentally is the same age when our brain fully develops). After that the heritability staus at around 80%.
Over the decades there have been numerous attempts to debunk and dismiss IQ... they failed. And the reason that they failed is because IQ has predictive validity. If something has predictive validity it means that we can use it to make consistent accurate predictions. We can take a million people, all with an IQ 90, and we can basically give you a rough estimate for how many of them will serve prison time, how many of them will graduate college, the average amount of money they will make, heck we can even estimate how many of them will die in a car crash (because lower IQ people tend to drive faster, and are less likely to wear a seat belt).
Environment is of course important, as this video explains. And IQ is by no means the only factor for determining 'success.' IQ also says nothing about whether you are a good person or not. There have been many intelligent people that have been complete monsters.
Also, IQ doesn't necessarily have to mean 'smart.' What is smart is ultimately subjective. You can view IQ tests as nothing more than a tool for making predictions about a population or a person. And we are ALWAYS dealing in averages. An average does not mean 'all.' If a person has a 130 IQ we can give you a percentage for how likely you are to finish college. But even if you have a high likelihood of finishing college, that still doesn't guarantee that you will finish college or even be successful. My IQ is 131 and yet that didn't stop me from becoming an alcoholic (which luckily I was able to stop drinking, thank God). But yeah, my point is, IQ is a powerful tool for prediction, but please don't think its somehow going to decide your life for you.
It does still matter though, and the reason why it matters is because the race IQ gap is a thing. Yes, Ashkanazi Jews have a higher average IQ than East Asians, and East Asians have a higher average IQ than non-Jewish whites, then Hispanics, and then blacks, and then Australian Aborigines. Its not racist, its just the grim reality we live in, and its nature being a total bitch as she often is. Again, I can't stress enough that we are talking about averages. Its not that all East Asians have a higher IQ than Hispanics, its that there are MORE East Asians with a high IQ then there are Hispanics with a high IQ.
I'm not saying that racism doesn't exist, racism obviously exists. But disparities in wealth and income... racism just can't account for that. The idea that non whites are poor and always being thrown in jail because white people are oppressing them... that, quite simply, cannot be accounted for entirely by racism. IQ is playing a part here. Its by no means the only factor involved, but it is still a factor. And we're eventually going to have to accept that if we ever want to make things better.
IQ only has predictive value in fields where its measures are valid. IQ is not a significant predictor of success in life or income. Environmental changes in the last century have correlated strongly with changes in IQ.
Yes, IQ is valid in fields where its measures are valid, and all the examples I gave are quantifiable.
No, I'm afraid IQ is a significant predictor of success, its not the only factor, but it is a significant factor. A great example would be many music artists. I don't think anyone is going to argue against the notion that your average MTV star isn't exactly that bright, yet they are still making quite a bit of money off of a talent that they have. So yeah, IQ isn't the only factor in play, but it is a factor.
And yes there have been environmental changes in the last two or so centuries that correlated strongly with IQ changes. The most important of these changes occurred right before the Industrial Revolution in Europe where the wealthy and middle class were out breeding the poor. The fact of the matter is that people with higher IQ tend to accumulate more wealth and they're more careful with their spending, and the conditions of Europe at that time favored the rising merchant class and their offspring tended to have more offspring. This caused an IQ spike in the population which may very well have led to the Industrial Revolution. So, yes, environmental factors can and do have an effect on IQ. I... don't see how that disproves anything I said? And yes, IQ rates have been going up in general around the world, that's the Flynn Effect as stated in this video.
Signum, in reading your comment I have figured out that you have a very high IQ.
A pregnant mother can help her child reach a higher potential by not drinking alcohol (which is the worst thing a mother can do to a fetus), taking biotin and other vitamins, and enough natural fats (which are necessary for nerves and neuron growth), having a safe, natural birth to assure adequate oxygenation during the birth process. Brains develop into puberty so getting enough sleep is important, avoid lead, mercury, heavy metals as they interfere with brain development.
I kept telling my 4th grade teacher that I could never learn to do long division. She got mad and forced me to stay in class during recess. Then she forced me to learn long division. It took about 10 minutes.
It is okay and I know this is an old video.
However, if the IQ test is correct, how the video didn't discuss the increase in IQ scores for east Aisa during a short period of time which cannot be correlate to genetics!?
The rise in IQ scores with increased access to education, healthcare and nutrition is known as Flynn Effect, but the Flynn Effect is "hollow for g". An IQ test is made up of a variety of subtests with varying "g loadings", subtests with a higher g loading are more representative of innate intelligence, while lower g loaded subtests are more trainable. Flynn Effect increases the latter.
Hmmm....notice how people of East Asian descent tend to have a much greater likelihood to thrive in life and to build advanced societies no matter where they are (Asia, USA, Europe, etc?)
Attractive people date other attractive people, picking people based on wittiness, humor indicating intelligence... and then there's still people who think intelligence doesn't have genetic components?
Thats evolutionary instinct for reproductive success
physical attractiveness is educational
@@sacha_mskyWrong
Most Anglos and Hispanics agree Germans are the most impressive immigrant group to the Americas. From Argentina to Alaska they have changed destiny.
Had the Germans not endured the first Thirty Year War (1618-1648) and the second Thirty Years Wars (1914 - 1945) would they be so extraordinarily intellectually and emotionally discipline?
“What does not kill you makes you stronger”
Nietzsche
Few people learn from their errors quicker than Germans.
Are you yourself of German descent?
@@18890426 no, I am Hispanic but very familiar with Germans and their culture.
Excellent talk - RP is so damn smart. Its disturbing that our society requires/rewards inherited intel more and more over the decades. Like gender race or baldness or weight - its something we can't help. See Yuval N Hariri's "useless class" problem and it is our biggest challenge as a society/planet.
Why should it be a problem that society has increasingly been rewarding inherited intelligence?
Natural selection.
incredibly insightful
Well done explanation! I wish other people would who think intelligence is not inheritable would listen to this.
I think IQ tests measure raw brain power for the most part. And for the most part, a lot of people like that in your society is an advantage. However it doesn't say much about life success due to "x factors" like creativity and ability to navigate social situations. Those are just as valuable as being a really smart computer lol. Honestly, a lot of people in the comments section of these vids sound like incels or people who mostly stay indoors.
Sounds like a cope, hence why you resort to the demeaning insults. After all, creativity and sociability are personality traits determined by genetics as well, and ultimately, you have an issue with the reality that determinism is real and environmentalism is a myth.
@@fuwa9616
It's not cope. High IQ individuals are not necessarily socially skilled. That's something you need to develop (or discover) when you're exposed to a wide range of social situations from before puberty. On the determinism vs environmentalism...you need to be careful how you present those terms. Even hereditarian authorities don't claim that environmental influence is a myth. And even if you have high processing power to quickly recognize and reason with information, you can still fall prey to cultural influences. Humans are socially programmed to follow the pack for the most part. It was probably a product of ancestral living conditions.
@@fuwa9616 Your statements are invalid. Creativity and sociability can be influenced by genetics, but they are not determined by genetics. The genetic influence on both of these traits is between 20% and 60% at the highest. The remaining percentage is attributed to environmental factors, and as you can see, environment can potentially be a stronger contributor. There is no personality trait in which can be attributed solely to genetics. To claim that environmental factors aren't an influence, is an outstanding cope.
i feel vindicated; and Idiocracy ( the film) explained why there are less smart folk, and a multitude of dumb Herd.
Fun fact: Heritability is different in each environment its studied. For example, the Heritability of high IQ in Japan is very different than the Heritability of high iq on the US.
What were the differences in studies? Or at least can i get a link?
Cough cough. Genetics. Japan is full of Japanese people, the majority population. Yes, there are Americans of Japanese decent in America, but they are the minority. America has more racial groups and in greater numbers in America than Japan does.