tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4624586630299165335.post6368286429687263727..comments2024-03-14T09:50:44.315+00:00Comments on Psychological comments: Genius? Avoid rare functional genesAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09320614837348759094noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4624586630299165335.post-38069935350482213152015-09-24T12:21:55.972+01:002015-09-24T12:21:55.972+01:00As an undergraduate, that is. Later he was looking...As an undergraduate, that is. Later he was looking for a Fellowship.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09320614837348759094noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4624586630299165335.post-32976435711421602302015-09-24T12:11:26.339+01:002015-09-24T12:11:26.339+01:00His one mistake was to turn down going to Cambridg...His one mistake was to turn down going to Cambridge. Only by being examined there could he become a Senior Wrangler. However, he is high in the pantheon nonetheless.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09320614837348759094noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4624586630299165335.post-15224939418484430842015-09-23T23:50:12.929+01:002015-09-23T23:50:12.929+01:00The list of Senior Wranglers excludes Clerk Maxwel...The list of Senior Wranglers excludes Clerk Maxwell!deariemenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4624586630299165335.post-26340285463114253882015-09-23T23:48:30.309+01:002015-09-23T23:48:30.309+01:00"If you define a genius as someone who has an..."If you define a genius as someone who has an IQ over a certain number": but why on earthy would you do that? "Genius" already has an existing and different meaning.deariemenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4624586630299165335.post-69437965247263119642015-09-22T12:06:12.391+01:002015-09-22T12:06:12.391+01:00I haven't got the inclusion criteria to hand, ...I haven't got the inclusion criteria to hand, but from memory they go for very high scores on demanding mathematical and reasoning tasks. Agree that conventional IQ testing is not the best way to find such people. A list of the Senior Wranglers suffices.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09320614837348759094noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4624586630299165335.post-53178238454866735872015-09-21T23:56:17.426+01:002015-09-21T23:56:17.426+01:00How do you find over 1400 people with IQs over 170...How do you find over 1400 people with IQs over 170 when there are no well-normed tests with ceilings over 160? (And none accurate over 150 due to subtest ceilings.) If you do somehow manage this feat, you would have vast numbers of people who scored in the 160s, certainly enough to realize that the normal distribution does not apply that far out and that the corresponding rarity number (0.0003 [percent]) is wrong. (I believe it was Cyril Burt who first noticed the leptokurtosis of the intelligence distribution. Log-normal and Pearson type IV distributions have been proposed for intelligence, but so far as I know the high-range data hasn't been good enough so far to decide the matter, though Burt favored the Pearson type IV distribution.) <br /><br />These apparent errors make me extremely dubious about the correctness of the more complicated analysis of the rest of this paper.EHnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4624586630299165335.post-57703299015295874902015-09-21T01:16:09.615+01:002015-09-21T01:16:09.615+01:00If you define a genius as someone who has an IQ ov...If you define a genius as someone who has an IQ over a certain number, let's say 140, then by definition a person with a 170 IQ is a genius. Since we never tested Shakespeare, Rembrandt or Darwin we can only guess at their intelligence. Conversely, do all people who have high IQs produce works of art, literature and science that resonate through the ages? No, they don't.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4624586630299165335.post-21807998304864610192015-09-21T00:17:47.593+01:002015-09-21T00:17:47.593+01:00I hope someone starts to look at the mothers. If e...I hope someone starts to look at the mothers. If early development is critical some of the critical genes may be in the mothers.<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4624586630299165335.post-91876848875372418492015-09-21T00:14:24.746+01:002015-09-21T00:14:24.746+01:00I think an element of not giving a **** ness is pr...I think an element of not giving a **** ness is probably required.<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4624586630299165335.post-88175910957264747772015-09-21T00:11:57.543+01:002015-09-21T00:11:57.543+01:00"suggesting it happens when some intelligence..."suggesting it happens when some intelligence damaging genes are not present"<br /><br />interestingAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4624586630299165335.post-84935669906633703372015-09-20T13:04:57.661+01:002015-09-20T13:04:57.661+01:00Is there any evidence that (i) you need an IQ >...Is there any evidence that (i) you need an IQ > 170 to be a genius, or (ii) that everyone with an IQ > 170 is a genius? Isn't this IQ-170 business just altering what we mean when we say that Shakespeare or Rembrandt or Darwin was a genius?deariemenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4624586630299165335.post-61254110403011768132015-09-19T22:33:35.118+01:002015-09-19T22:33:35.118+01:00I'm glad you're covering this conferences ...I'm glad you're covering this conferences for those of us who couldn't afford to go!<br /><br /><i>"We did not observe any individual protein-altering variants that are reproducibly associated with extremely high intelligence and within the entire distribution of intelligence."</i><br /><br />They're looking for love in all the wrong places. I seriously doubt protein-altering genes are where we're going find most of our money. Likely, as Steve Hsu has pointed out, it is the regulatory loci where the good stuff will be found. In any case, I suspect rapid progress in the next 10 years as soon as researchers learn from all the dead ends they've run into.JayManhttp://www.unz.com/author/jayman/noreply@blogger.com