Nicholas Wade and the Reality of Race

[7437]

I said "Environment, as most people typically conceive of it, has little to do with sibling differences."

That middle clause is important - as is the fact I'm comparing brothers and sisters.

Most people conceive of environmental effects to knowledge, for example, as being something like more books in the home or the parents reading to their children.

But studies show these environmental differences have no effect.

Not to bore you with facts, but this is wrong.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2598751/
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/...sCustomisedMessage=&userIsAuthenticated=false
http://psycnet.apa.org/psycarticles/2012-07443-001

I can find more if you want.

 

[Cold Front]

You're losing me. Environment in my mind is external forces. Those shape behavior. Disagree?

Yeah, "environment" is a poor word for non-heritable influences - although it's better than "nuture."

We really don't have any better control over the environmental inputs than we have over the genetic ones because we don't understand what they are and how they work. One experiment says one thing and another experiment comes along and contradicts it.

Whatever they are, they're not simple and straightforward, except in the most extreme conditions.

Does an organism make conscious decisions based on learning and innate desires or will science someday allow us to map out a being's entire personality upon birth?

The assumption is that even his ability to make decisions is mediated by his genes.

 

[7437]

The point is that stark differences in a single family can occur for genetic reasons - just like a sober man can occasionally be found in a family of drunkards.

Environment decided that I will not drink. I used to be every bit of the drunk my family is, until I decided to quit. My learning from my environment trumps my genetic urge to get hammered all the time. Damn thing is tough though. It is always there, nudging behavior in that direction. Does not mean that everyone with the predisposition has to though.

 

[jamiejamie6661]

Wikipedia is telling me there are two Nicholas Wades. One is a journalist and the other an academic. I wonder which one is trying to connect race to genetics and social constructs?

 

[Cold Front]

Not to bore you with facts, but this is wrong.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2598751/
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/...sCustomisedMessage=&userIsAuthenticated=false
http://psycnet.apa.org/psycarticles/2012-07443-001

I can find more if you want.

You could, and I could find you just as many showing you that you're wrong.

 

[7437]

It's not learned behavior ! For Christ's sake, read the damn article. They were gradually domesticated.

(Some of them were also gradually made more vicious to the point they would throw themselves against their cages upon the approach of any person.)

As for earlier using "tame" instead of "domesticated," bite me. It's late.

Of course they were friendly, he bred them to have that disposition, and then hand fed them. I would still bet that (just like any dog) you can train that trait right out of them. No one does because they cost 8k and have a waiting list a mile long, but it is possible. Might take a little more effort since they are predisposed to be friendly, but the behavior is not genetic.

 

[Cold Front]

Environment decided that I will not drink. I used to be every bit of the drunk my family is, until I decided to quit.

You're still not getting it. Even the desire to reform later in life is heritable.

Remember the law: All human behavioral traits are heritable.

 

[7437]

You could, and I could find you just as many showing you that you're wrong.

You seriously dont think SES has any connection to behavior. I would like to see that study.

 

[7437]

You're still not getting it. Even the desire to reform later in life is heritable.

Remember the law: All human behavioral traits are heritable.

Ok, I know that predisposition to addiction is genetic, but I have never seen any study that claims wanting to reform later in life is please provide on that. It sounds sketchy.

The validity of that law is what our original argument was about.

 

[Cold Front]

Of course they were friendly, he bred them to have that disposition, and then hand fed them. I would still bet that (just like any dog) you can train that trait right out of them. No one does because they cost 8k and have a waiting list a mile long, but it is possible. Might take a little more effort since they are predisposed to be friendly, but the behavior is not genetic.

Yes it is genetic. He treated the foxes the same. The ones bred for viciousness were vicious; the ones bred for tameness were tame. No training was required.

As to whether one could later tame the vicious foxes and make vicious the tame foxes, I am sure there might be some small counter-effect, but it would be greatly undermined by the breeding, and the longer the breeding went on the less successful it would be.

 

[Cold Front]

Ok, I know that predisposition to addiction is genetic, but I have never seen any study that claims wanting to reform later in life is please provide on that. It sounds sketchy.

The validity of that law is what our original argument was about.

*Everything* is heritable. Didn't it raise your eyebrows when I said that even homophobia is more heritable than homosexual behavior?

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com...volutionary-psychology-and-antigay-attitudes/

You seriously dont think SES has any connection to behavior. I would like to see that study.

Well, there's obviously a strong correlation between the two, but that's the problem. Few scientists bother to disentangle the correlations. Do I make money because I'm smart and my parents passed those genes for intelligence on to me? Or am I smart because my parents made money and provided a good environment for me to grow up in?

So of course SES has a connection to behavior, but what connection?

 

[7437]

*Everything* is heritable. Didn't it raise your eyebrows when I said that even homophobia is more heritable than homosexual behavior?

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com...volutionary-psychology-and-antigay-attitudes/

Had to go through that a couple times to make sure I got it right. And find some follow ups from gallup, now my eyes hurt.

He certainly showed that there is a correlation between having children, or even the idea of them, and homophobia. Also a very compelling reasoning as to why homophobia could be an adaptive advantage. He did not show that these actually are being genetically passed down to offspring, as opposed to being taught. Many adaptively advantageous behaviors are taught and not genetic, such as language. He did a follow up interview in 2011 he mentioned he had a Taiwanese student replicate his findings, showing that his 1995 study was not because of western culture. This does not rule out homophobia being a learned behavior across cultures, only that it is not caused by western culture.

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com...bia-bad-science-or-bad-science-comprehension/

Well, there's obviously a strong correlation between the two, but that's the problem. Few scientists bother to disentangle the correlations. Do I make money because I'm smart and my parents passed those genes for intelligence on to me? Or am I smart because my parents made money and provided a good environment for me to grow up in?

So of course SES has a connection to behavior, but what connection?

You cant seriously think that rich people are somehow genetically superior to poor people. That is the plot of the book The Time Machine. Moving on to actual facts.

There are studies that show the effect of SES on IQ and things like that. This study shows a jump of 12-18 IQ points when adopting out of a working class household and into a middle class one. That is a massive difference. Environment is the most important factor.

http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/amp/67/2/130/

God I am glad to be done with this post. Its like writing an actual paper pouring through these studies.

 

[OldGoat]

Because not every human trait is heritable.

Even that post you typed is determined by your biology. Again, I ask all you anti science political agenda types: do you believe you have free will and if so where does it come from?

 

[OldGoat]

You brought this up in another thread as well I believe.

You question is at best disingenuous. At worst shows no real understanding of the concept.

Very loosely if you believe in "free will" it is simply stating you hold people to be culpable for their actions. Everyone believes this and acts as if they do. I am more than certain you included.

If you are trying to equate free will to random, no one believes this or would argue it. Arguably though some behaviors certainly derive from reasons of such complexity that we can't currently model them or predict them and may never be able to. While there are certainly reasons for these behaviors they may not be knowable.

Pragmatically there is no one we wouldn't consider insane that doesn't believe and act as if there is free will.

Ah, someone did address it.

Your post is absolutely untrue. Quite a few scientists who are real scientists and the not the social variety believe that free will is illusionary yet beneficial for individuals in a society to believe. I can't link sources easily on a mobile thingy so I'll do that later today.

 

[7437]

Even that post you typed is determined by your biology. Again, I ask all you anti science political agenda types: do you believe you have free will and if so where does it come from?

The post was determined by my environment. I am certainly not anti science, ive linked a dozen studies in this thread alone.

Free will itself is hard to define. People's behavior is cause by a complicated mix of environmental factors, past experiences, and genetic predisposition. Each person has a different mix, so we all act different. In a way, it controls us. From another perspective, it is us.

 

[OldGoat]

Environment decided that I will not drink. I used to be every bit of the drunk my family is, until I decided to quit. My learning from my environment trumps my genetic urge to get hammered all the time. Damn thing is tough though. It is always there, nudging behavior in that direction. Does not mean that everyone with the predisposition has to though.

Not so. Your body that was directed to grow the way it did by your genes "chose" not to drink based upon the environment and it's history. If you got thrown in the middle of the ocean you'd drown because your genes did make you a fish. No one is denying that the environment changes your body. That is a strawman argument if there ever was one. Yet you deny physics and biology control humans. Where does this autonomous agent come from? God?

 

[7437]

Not so. Your body that was directed to grow the way it did by your genes "chose" not to drink based upon the environment and it's history. If you got thrown in the middle of the ocean you'd drown because your genes did make you a fish. No one is denying that the environment changes your body. That is a strawman argument if there ever was one. Yet you deny physics and biology control humans. Where does this autonomous agent come from? God?

Ok, so everyone's basic physiological form is designed by genetics yeah. People are not identical though, even the identical twins are very different. Genetics play a role, but past experiences are where the rest of behavior comes from. If it was pure biology, people would be incapable of learning things.

I wasnt born able to type these posts, the skill comes from past experience. I would be willing to bet money the same is true for you.

 

[OldGoat]

The post was determined by my environment. I am certainly not anti science, ive linked a dozen studies in this thread alone.

Free will itself is hard to define. People's behavior is cause by a complicated mix of environmental factors, past experiences, and genetic predisposition. Each person has a different mix, so we all act different. In a way, it controls us. From another perspective, it is us.

And you cannot disentangle all those influences. It is literally impossible. Now, what is important is the concept that the structure of your body and how it works is determined by real physical not metaphysical or supernatural forces.

Will a fast computer chip ever have free will? If so where'd it come from? Or is it just an illusion because of the complexity and unpredictability of its analysis? What physical component of the human mind allows humans to ignore physics?

 

[7437]

And you cannot disentangle all those influences. It is literally impossible. Now, what is important is the concept that the structure of your body and how it works is determined by real physical not metaphysical or supernatural forces.

Will a fast computer chip ever have free will? If so where'd it come from? Or is it just an illusion because of the complexity and unpredictability of its analysis? What physical component of the human mind allows humans to ignore physics?

I would tend to think this. Are you going anywhere with this line of thinking?

 

[OldGoat]

Ok, so everyone's basic physiological form is designed by genetics yeah. People are not identical though, even the identical twins are very different. Genetics play a role, but past experiences are where the rest of behavior comes from. If it was pure biology, people would be incapable of learning things.

I wasnt born able to type these posts, the skill comes from past experience. I would be willing to bet money the same is true for you.

Of course environment has a major impact on behavior. It also has a major impact on every cell of your body. A few seconds of gamma ray exposure would prove that. If you really think about it we and other organisms are all part of the universe and we just happen to be self aware clumps. But holistically you cannot separate gene and environment effects since they are strongly non linearly linked. We create our environment to a degree based on our genes and the environments impact on our bodies and genes. Mathematically you'll never be able to separate these variables. It's literally impossible without a full universe simulator. Which I suppose this reality could be.