Re: IQ AND RACE. The taboo subject.

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Gerold Firl: "Re: mckenna,david abrahms,ethnologies"
• Previous message: Stephen Lajoie: "Re: IQ AND RACE. The taboo subject."
• Maybe in reply to: Stephen Lajoie: "IQ AND RACE. The taboo subject."
• Next in thread: David Waters: "Re: IQ AND RACE. The taboo subject."

In article <D43K8H.7rL@sun2.iusb.indiana.edu>,
Frank Fujita <ffujita@sun1.iusb.indiana.edu> wrote:
>Stephen Lajoie (lajoie@eskimo.com) wrote:
>: My point was not that SAT and race are related, but that if someone
>: implies that there is any mental difference in the distrubtion of
>: intelligence between races that they will be put under a great deal of
>: pressure to resign.
>
>I don't think this is true. The fact that the scores are different is
>not controversial. The belief that the differences in the scores are
>reflective of genetic heritage *is* what is controversial.

I should have been more clear, but you do see that they are trying to get
him fired.

>: Your assertion is not supported by any data that I've seen. I've seen
>: reports that the genetic factor is about 60%.
>
>While we have evidence that the heritability of IQ is .60, heritibility
>does not equal "genetic factor" and it also does not mean that the
>differences between groups are .60 heritable.

It is a reasonable conclusion, and it doesn't require the wild
assumptions that other people have made.

>Frank Fujita

-- 

--

Steve La Joie

lajoie@eskimo.com






 Next message: Gerold Firl: "Re: mckenna,david abrahms,ethnologies"
 Previous message: Stephen Lajoie: "Re: IQ AND RACE. The taboo subject."
 Maybe in reply to: Stephen Lajoie: "IQ AND RACE. The taboo subject."

 Next in thread: David Waters: "Re: IQ AND RACE. The taboo subject."