The Black Brain size deficit Genomic study -revisited (V technical) 
Author Message
 The Black Brain size deficit Genomic study -revisited (V technical)

Quote:

> It will probably turn out that there are over 100 variable genes for
> IQ, not just two or three or four.   East Asians will have some alleles
> for higher IQ in greater proportions than do Europeans and vice-versa.
> Further there will be genes for lower IQ that have a selective
> advantage---at least one or two have been found.

Why do you say this? Who in prehistory was better off not being too
bright? The arrow of development in hominid evolution is toward greater
intelligence (with significant periods of stasis). Why would it be
reversed?

Quote:
> How this is so I am not sure.

Hmm.

Quote:
> Further advances in genetics will make the argument for some genetic
> based differences in IQ between races irrefutable.
> Will this truth then be accepted publicly?  Will the critics be
> silenced?  No. "You cannot reason a person out of an opinion they came
> to without reason" or something like that.

"It is impossible to reason someone out of something that he did not
reason himself into in the first place." (Swift)

However, there is more involved here than the simple the refutation of
a single isolated belief. Racial equality is only one part of a larger
worldview, all of which would be threatened if it could be shown that
racial IQ differences are substantially genetic in origin.

What we would probably see is the slow erosion of support for
indefensible "nurture" based initiatives like Affirmative Action,
leading eventualy to their disappearance, but no explicit mea culpa
from "progressives" (who are, as we know, always right even when they
are wrong, since, unlike "conservatives", their hearts are in the right
place, even when their heads are somewhere else).

Quote:
> I believe it was:
> As Vincent Sarich said, If people believe that people of West African
> origin do not have a genetic advantage in sprint races they will
> believe (and disbelieve anything).

Just look at ROM; people *will* believe anything.


Thu, 02 Oct 2008 21:39:35 GMT
 The Black Brain size deficit Genomic study -revisited (V technical)

Quote:

> Why do you say this? Who in prehistory was better off not being too
> bright?

There are definite benefits to not being too bright: many really smart
people I know spend all their time fantasising about the great things
they're going to do, rather than actually doing them.

As for prehistory, a tribe with a couple of smart people and ten dumb
but tough warriors would probably be far more likely to survive than a
tribe with a dozen smart people and no warriors.

    Mark



Thu, 02 Oct 2008 21:44:10 GMT
 The Black Brain size deficit Genomic study -revisited (V technical)

Quote:


> > Why do you say this? Who in prehistory was better off not being too
> > bright?

> There are definite benefits to not being too bright: many really smart
> people I know spend all their time fantasising about the great things
> they're going to do, rather than actually doing them.

That is an artefact of the present age, where smart people are indulged
at the expense of everyone else. Couldn't happen in prehistory.

Quote:
> As for prehistory, a tribe with a couple of smart people and ten dumb
> but tough warriors would probably be far more likely to survive than a
> tribe with a dozen smart people and no warriors.

>     Mark

Why do you exclude the possibility of smart warriors?


Thu, 02 Oct 2008 21:48:18 GMT
 The Black Brain size deficit Genomic study -revisited (V technical)

Quote:

> Why do you exclude the possibility of smart warriors?

Smart people tend not appreciate having other people swing big rocks at
their head.

    Mark



Thu, 02 Oct 2008 21:59:32 GMT
 The Black Brain size deficit Genomic study -revisited (V technical)

Quote:


> > Why do you exclude the possibility of smart warriors?

> Smart people tend not appreciate having other people swing big rocks at
> their head.

Do we take it then that people like Alexander the Great, Nelson,
Wellington, Drake and others that would soon come to mind were a little
bit on the dim side?


Thu, 02 Oct 2008 22:19:31 GMT
 The Black Brain size deficit Genomic study -revisited (V technical)

Quote:

> Do we take it then that people like Alexander the Great, Nelson,
> Wellington, Drake and others that would soon come to mind were a little
> bit on the dim side?

I don't seem to remember Wellington going hand-to-hand with Napoleon
swinging a big rock.

    Mark



Thu, 02 Oct 2008 22:22:10 GMT
 The Black Brain size deficit Genomic study -revisited (V technical)

Quote:


> > Do we take it then that people like Alexander the Great, Nelson,
> > Wellington, Drake and others that would soon come to mind were a little
> > bit on the dim side?

> I don't seem to remember Wellington going hand-to-hand with Napoleon
> swinging a big rock.

My point precisely!


Thu, 02 Oct 2008 22:24:09 GMT
 The Black Brain size deficit Genomic study -revisited (V technical)

Quote:

> My point precisely!

No, my point precisely: Wellington had plenty of dumb-ass warriors to
do the dying while he told them what to do from the back.

    Mark



Thu, 02 Oct 2008 23:09:38 GMT
 The Black Brain size deficit Genomic study -revisited (V technical)

Quote:


> > My point precisely!

> No, my point precisely: Wellington had plenty of dumb-ass warriors to
> do the dying while he told them what to do from the back.

You surely don't deny Wellington the staus of warrior.

As regards the general intellectual calibre of the troops under his
command then how on earth can we tell. They would in the main have been
recruited from the impoverished rural shires and would have enjoyed
little education.

It should also be realised that Wellington had a successful political
career at times concurrent with his military career.

In fact, leadership and military prowness does go hand in hand. Our
medieval earls and barons owned vast areas of land inherited from
ancestors or bestowed upon them by a grateful monarch. Very often they
met their ends {*filter*}ly on the field of combat.There are effigys of
them in military dress in just about every medieval church n the land.



Thu, 02 Oct 2008 23:25:25 GMT
 The Black Brain size deficit Genomic study -revisited (V technical)
Quote:



>>> It will probably turn out that there are over 100 variable genes for
>>> IQ, not just two or three or four.   East Asians will have some alleles
>>> for higher IQ in greater proportions than do Europeans and vice-versa.
>>> Further there will be genes for lower IQ that have a selective
>>> advantage---at least one or two have been found.
>> Why do you say this? Who in prehistory was better off not being too
>> bright? The arrow of development in hominid evolution is toward greater
>> intelligence (with significant periods of stasis). Why would it be
>> reversed?

> I'm not taking sides here, but I can see the possibility that in
> some environments, hunter gatherers were able to survive quite
> easily with no need for any superlative intelligence. It also
> seems that the more athletically vigorous fighters might have
> been able to knock off the now and then brighter boys, steal
> their women and reproduce their own traits, abundantly. It might
> have also been to their advantage to exterminate the brighter,
> harder to manage women and keep the more docile, easily managed
> ones for reproduction purposes. Would such a scenario lead to the
> development of a higher level of intelligence, or would it lead
> to the development of a  more robust athletic ability?

> Gordon

Atruelove himself is evidence that inferior genes will always fly to an
environment where they can at least not feel totally isolated.
Down amongst the born again survivalists peering out from behind their
swastika decorated nuclear laagers...;-)


Sun, 05 Oct 2008 02:37:30 GMT
 The Black Brain size deficit Genomic study -revisited (V technical)

Quote:



> >> It will probably turn out that there are over 100 variable genes for
> >> IQ, not just two or three or four.   East Asians will have some alleles
> >> for higher IQ in greater proportions than do Europeans and vice-versa.
> >> Further there will be genes for lower IQ that have a selective
> >> advantage---at least one or two have been found.

> >Why do you say this? Who in prehistory was better off not being too
> >bright? The arrow of development in hominid evolution is toward greater
> >intelligence (with significant periods of stasis). Why would it be
> >reversed?

> I'm not taking sides here, but I can see the possibility that in
> some environments, hunter gatherers were able to survive quite
> easily with no need for any superlative intelligence. It also
> seems that the more athletically vigorous fighters might have
> been able to knock off the now and then brighter boys, steal
> their women and reproduce their own traits, abundantly. It might
> have also been to their advantage to exterminate the brighter,
> harder to manage women and keep the more docile, easily managed
> ones for reproduction purposes. Would such a scenario lead to the
> development of a higher level of intelligence, or would it lead
> to the development of a  more robust athletic ability?

If the question is whether natural selection will favor brains or
braun, then the answer is clear cut: "Sometimes the one, sometimes
the other".  But the better answer is that it will almost always
favor having both in one individual.  So why is it that we tend
to see these two characteristics as incompatible?

Perhaps the interesting question is whether there is something
in human physiology that prevents maximizing both - something that
forces a tradeoff.

Or perhaps it is not something in the physiology - perhaps it is
something in the culture.  If you are inclined that way, you can
put a racist slant on your 'just-so stories'.  Chinese culture was
organized so that successful mandarins had more offspring than
successful warriors, but Zulu society was organized so that successful
warriors got more rewards than competent artisans.  The trouble with
this kind of storytelling is that it leaves open the question as to
why a culture in East Asia should go one way, while a culture in
South-central Africa should go another.  Plus it doesn't explain why
you don't get both brains and braun everywhere.



Sun, 05 Oct 2008 04:10:13 GMT
 The Black Brain size deficit Genomic study -revisited (V technical)

Quote:

> >> It will probably turn out that there are over 100 variable genes for
> >> IQ, not just two or three or four.   East Asians will have some alleles
> >> for higher IQ in greater proportions than do Europeans and vice-versa.
> >> Further there will be genes for lower IQ that have a selective
> >> advantage---at least one or two have been found.

> >Why do you say this? Who in prehistory was better off not being too
> >bright? The arrow of development in hominid evolution is toward greater
> >intelligence (with significant periods of stasis). Why would it be
> >reversed?

> I'm not taking sides here, but I can see the possibility that in
> some environments, hunter gatherers were able to survive quite
> easily with no need for any superlative intelligence.

But Rushtown was claiming a selective *advantage" for lower IQ, not the
absence of disadvantage. It was from hunter gatherers that the first
humans emerged. If they did not need intelligence, why did it evolve?

Quote:
> seems that the more athletically vigorous fighters might have
> been able to knock off the now and then brighter boys, steal
> their women and reproduce their own traits, abundantly.

Where did you get dichotomy "athletically vigorous vs brighter"? From
contemporary experience of college athletes, perhaps?

Quote:
> It might
> have also been to their advantage to exterminate the brighter,
> harder to manage women and keep the more docile, easily managed
> ones for reproduction purposes.

Sounds like you have been watching "The Man Show". In any case, this
would lead to the men also becoming dull and docile.
Quote:
> Would such a scenario lead to the
> development of a higher level of intelligence, or would it lead
> to the development of a  more robust athletic ability?

> Gordon



Sun, 05 Oct 2008 04:27:23 GMT
 The Black Brain size deficit Genomic study -revisited (V technical)

Quote:

> But Rushtown was claiming a selective *advantage" for lower IQ, not the
> absence of disadvantage. It was from hunter gatherers that the first
> humans emerged. If they did not need intelligence, why did it evolve?

{*filter*} selection. Higher intelligence facilitates more sophisticated
cognitive and behavioural displays which, in a manner akin to the peacock's
tail, fascinate and captivate potential mates. Such fascination leads to
more reproduction, often with females that then get stupider males to
provide for the offspring...

M.



Sun, 05 Oct 2008 04:33:55 GMT
 The Black Brain size deficit Genomic study -revisited (V technical)

Quote:



> > But Rushtown was claiming a selective *advantage" for lower IQ, not the
> > absence of disadvantage. It was from hunter gatherers that the first
> > humans emerged. If they did not need intelligence, why did it evolve?

> {*filter*} selection. Higher intelligence facilitates more sophisticated
> cognitive and behavioural displays which, in a manner akin to the peacock's
> tail, fascinate and captivate potential mates.

But why does it "fascinate and captivate" them? Why did the capacity to
be fascinated and captivated by displays of sophistication evolve?
There must be something in it for the females for them to make such
choices.

 Such fascination leads to

Quote:
> more reproduction, often with females that then get stupider males to
> provide for the offspring...

> M.



Sun, 05 Oct 2008 04:44:29 GMT
 The Black Brain size deficit Genomic study -revisited (V technical)

Quote:

>> {*filter*} selection. Higher intelligence facilitates more sophisticated
>> cognitive and behavioural displays which, in a manner akin to the
>> peacock's
>> tail, fascinate and captivate potential mates.

> But why does it "fascinate and captivate" them? Why did the capacity to
> be fascinated and captivated by displays of sophistication evolve?
> There must be something in it for the females for them to make such
> choices.

There, plainly, speaks a guy who's never used humour, poetry or music to get
himself laid.

M.



Sun, 05 Oct 2008 04:47:29 GMT
 
 [ 53 post ]  Go to page: [1] [2] [3] [4]

 Relevant Pages 

1. New Genomic mtDNA study of melanesians.

2. Face size decreases as brain size increases...

3. Face size decreases as brain size increases...

4. Study: Black Males Perceived As Threat Even by Blacks

5. human brain vs dolphin brain - brainchart.gif (0/1)

6. Brain size and IQ

7. Brain size, IQ

8. Brain size, IQ

9. Hominid Brain Size: Testosterone, DHEA, and Melatonin

10. Physical Correllations show Black IQ deficit (was "Blacks are not THAT different")

11. Size matters, at least with brain structures

12. PUFAs & brain size


 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software