User:MjolnirPants/RnI FYI
Below are answers to frequently asked questions about the corresponding page User:MjolnirPants. They address concerns, questions, and misconceptions which have repeatedly arisen on the talk page. Please update this material when needed. |
- No evidence for such a connection has ever been published. A statement signed by 143 senior human population geneticists states categorically that genetics research in no way supports the view that "recent natural selection has led to worldwide differences in I.Q. test results". (See this for context.)
- As understanding of the human genome and the science of population genetics advances, it has become increasingly clear that race is not a biologically meaningful way to categorize human population groups. See for example this statement by the American Association of Physical Anthropologists.
- Even if we take ancestral population groups to be proxies for race, most subject-matter experts agree that cognitive differences between such such groups are unlikely to exist. A group of prominent geneticists explains why here.
- Extensive evidence has been published which indicates that observed differences in IQ test performance between racial groups are environmental in origin. A group of leading psychologists summarizes some of these findings here.
- Most researchers view the idea of a genetic connection between race and intelligence as scientifically obsolete. See e.g. this statement by the editorial board of Nature.
Among the minority of geneticists who believe that cognitive differences between ancestral populations are likely to exist, the consensus is that such differences must be minuscule and, further, that we currently have no indication which groups are likely to be favored by cognitive advantages. Geneticist David Reich represents this view, stating his belief that while "very modest differences across human population in the genetic influences on behavior and cognition are to be expected [...] we do not yet have any idea about what the differences are".[4] Thus, geneticists roundly reject the idea that the heritability of IQ indicates that observed differences in IQ test performance between ancestral population groups have a genetic component.We need to get away from thinking about intelligence as if it were a trait like milk yield in a herd of cattle, controlled by a small, persistent and dedicated bunch of genetic variants that can be selectively bred into animals from one generation to the next. It is quite the opposite – thousands of variants affect intelligence, they are constantly changing, and they affect other traits. It is not impossible for natural selection to produce populations with differences in intelligence, but these factors make it highly unlikely.
To end up with systematic genetic differences in intelligence between large, ancient populations, the selective forces driving those differences would need to have been enormous. What’s more, those forces would have to have acted across entire continents, with wildly different environments, and have been persistent over tens of thousands of years of tremendous cultural change. Such a scenario is not just speculative – I would argue it is inherently and deeply implausible.
The bottom line is this. While genetic variation may help to explain why one person is more intelligent than another, there are unlikely to be stable and systematic genetic differences that make one population more intelligent than the next.[3]
- These surveys are almost invariably conducted by advocates of scientific racism.
- Respondents to these surveys are also almost exclusively members of groups that promote scientific racism.
- These surveys tend to have very low participation rates, and often consist of fewer than 100 respondents.
- Many of the surveys suffer from methodological flaws, such as using leading questions. This leads to an increase in responses from those who agree, and a decrease from those who disagree.
- Generally speaking, the better the methodology of the survey, the lower agreement it shows with the claim of a genetic link between race and intelligence.
- Even the most poorly structured surveys, conducted among members of groups that are dominated by advocates for scientific racism, show much doubt and difference of opinion among respondents.
- In such surveys, the average percentage of the measured delta (about 15 points between the highest average racial score and the lowest average racial score) estimated to be explained by genetics is 1-5%; less than half the delta expected between two identical IQ tests taken by the same person on different days. In other words: statistically meaningless.
- The vast majority of respondents have absolutely no qualifications to speak on genetics.