for a contrast

It's saying race is real

there is no contrast

Racial differences

but their study doesn't do work on other races for intelligence; says so right there

hello?

It's saying it's can't differentiate within a race as well as among the different races

Because races groups are so similar

Lol

You're trolling me

Read the whole thing

Every month that passes they map more genes

European!

Still, the issue is accuracy—or lack of it. Right now, the polygenic scores capture only a fraction of the genetic determinants of intelligence and none of the environmental ones. That means the predictions remain fuzzy.

"none of the environmental ones. "

Because why

ANd there it is

Nature AND Nurture

It's not measuring environmental ones

That's not what IQ measures

If you ONLY examine NATURE, you conclusions are OF COURSE going to be based ONLY on nature

Until they examine both, 'willl be fuzzy'

It's only a measure of general intelligence

It's fuzzy why?

It says why

No, it's fuzzy because all the genome isn't mapped yet..... So it's margin of error is an issue

It's so close though it can give a range

23 and me won't do it, not because it's inaccurate.... Because the reaction

It's not measuring success in the workplace.... I'm not sure your understand what's being measured.

<:OOF:459550070942203924>

The WAIS-IV yields scores on four domains: verbal, perceptual, working memory, and processing speed. The reliability of the test is high (more than 0.95), and it shows substantial construct validity. The WAIS-IV is correlated highly with other IQ tests such as the Stanford-Binet, as well as with criteria of academic and life success, including college grades, measures of work performance, and occupational level. It also shows significant correlations with measures of everyday functioning among the mentally retarded.

http://open.lib.umn.edu/intropsyc/chapter/9-1-defining-and-measuring-intelligence/

More than .95 reliability....that's almost perfect...an unheard of reliability Stat....it's just true.

.95 !

This is near perfection.

The test works.

Hh

reposting this because I never got a response

@Deleted User race is still a sub-optimal grouping mechanism if you're trying to select for highly polygenetic traits such as intelligence or emotional temperament, and there's no particular reason if you're trying to exclude and/or include people based upon traits such as intelligence to do so along racial lines. The genetics of different population groups fall along normal distributions and are not uniform across any single group- genetics is something that acts out mechanistically on an individual/pair level first and only by circumstance as part of a larger subpopulation. The unifying factor of who is decided to be 'black' and 'white' is largely done based upon aesthetic appearances- not actually intelligence or emotional temperament- and appearances that are derived from relatively few genetic mutations compared to things like intelligence.

That might depend on the definition of "race".

White and Black aren’t Races in the first place @skreee

it doesn’t matter you can apply the criticism to whatever traditional racial/ethnic subgroups you want to draw lines around @L0GAN