tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4624586630299165335.post8393345640912334901..comments2024-03-14T09:50:44.315+00:00Comments on Psychological comments: ORIGINAL PAPER: "A response to Prof Rabbitt – The Victorians were still cleverer than us" by Woodley, te Nijenhuis and MurphyAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09320614837348759094noreply@blogger.comBlogger14125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4624586630299165335.post-79339585586730239142014-12-07T02:49:32.810+00:002014-12-07T02:49:32.810+00:00The barrier to novelty is much higher now than it ...The barrier to novelty is much higher now than it was during the Victorian era. The amount of material that has to be learnt in a field to be considered an expert and to actually participate on the frontier is much higher now than it was then. All the easy stuff has been discovered, and is now taught to undergraduates. After two semesters of basic physics, chemistry, and biology many undergraduates know far more than most intelligent scientists in the Victorian era. <br /><br />You know take thermodynamics, how hard was it to do the first experiments on entropy? I mean, a child could do the same experiment. What's required to do an experiment in particle physics? A PhD and a large machine worth more than most scientists will make in a lifetime. <br /><br />Something like the law of diminishing returns suggests itself. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06576869735612306153noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4624586630299165335.post-28783313591045108362014-12-07T02:48:32.826+00:002014-12-07T02:48:32.826+00:00This comment has been removed by the author.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06576869735612306153noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4624586630299165335.post-51801944309547727992013-05-24T20:29:07.780+01:002013-05-24T20:29:07.780+01:00Like Sea Serpents.Like Sea Serpents.Flinthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17111419363177838129noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4624586630299165335.post-78792469545665229702013-05-24T18:14:19.333+01:002013-05-24T18:14:19.333+01:00Keep in mind... Woodley may be better known for hi...Keep in mind... Woodley may be better known for his studies of Sea Serpent Taxonomy.<br /><br />http://www.cryptomundo.com/cryptozoo-news/crypto-pinnipeds/<br />http://www.forteantimes.com/reviews/books/3169/in_the_wake_of_bernard_heuvelmans.html<br />http://publicationslist.org/M.A.Woodley<br />http://scholar.google.co.uk/citations?user=mmoY0-kAAAAJ&hl=en<br />http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FbPb-etyiG0#t=2m18s<br /><br />When he isn't working on taxonomies of Sea Serpents for Crypto-zoology; he is trying to argue that race among humans constitute subspecies with impact on intelligence, democratization and GDP.<br /><br />"M A Woodley (2010) Is Homo sapiens polytypic? Human taxonomic diversity and its implications Medical Hypotheses 74: 1. 195-201 <br />Abstract: The term race is a traditional synonym for subspecies, however it is frequently asserted that Homo sapiens is monotypic and that what are termed races are nothing more than biological illusions. In this manuscript a case is made for the hypothesis that H.sapiens is polytypic, and in this way is no different from other species exhibiting similar levels of genetic and morphological diversity. First it is demonstrated that the four major definitions of race/subspecies can be shown to be synonymous within the context of the framework of race as a correlation structure of traits. Next the issue of taxonomic classification is considered where it is demonstrated that H.sapiens possesses high levels morphological diversity, genetic heterozygosity and differentiation (FST) compared to many species that are acknowledged to be polytypic with respect to subspecies. Racial variation is then evaluated in light of the phylogenetic species concept, where it is suggested that the least inclusive monophyletic units exist below the level of species within H.sapiens indicating the existence of a number of potential human phylogenetic species; and the biological species concept, where it is determined that racial variation is too small to represent differentiation at the level of biological species. Finally the implications of this are discussed in the context of anthropology where an accurate picture of the sequence and timing of events during the evolution of human taxa are required for a complete picture of human evolution, and medicine, where a greater appreciation of the role played by human taxonomic differences in disease susceptibility and treatment responsiveness will save lives in the future."Flinthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17111419363177838129noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4624586630299165335.post-80549867557448250492013-05-24T17:30:29.726+01:002013-05-24T17:30:29.726+01:00Prof Rabbitt has posted a reply as a postscript to...Prof Rabbitt has posted a reply as a postscript to the original post. You can find it if you scroll down on this post http://bit.ly/10XBWKKdeevybeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15118040887173718391noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4624586630299165335.post-3571346340508112362013-05-21T16:02:37.146+01:002013-05-21T16:02:37.146+01:00" ... a significant innovation ... is simply ..." ... a significant innovation ... is simply one ... that multiple encyclopedists and compilers of inventories of innovation are likely to independently note [it]."<br /><br />Since encyclopaedists are forever pillaging each others' work the chances of "independently" occurring are slight. <br /><br />Anyhow, the statement is a mere assertion that might be better phrased as "I haven't thought of a better way to measure this so I'm going to claim that this is the best, perhaps the only, way to do it." But how can you test it? If you can't the claim is unscientific.<br /><br />"Similarly geniuses can be rated via the degree to which these same sources reference them." Come now. You'd probably be as well using the Einstein's Wall method. On Einstein's wall hung portraits of Newton, Faraday and Clerk Maxwell, so the four greatest physicists are those three plus Albert himself: this too is a windy assertion but at least has the advantage of avoiding the bogus scientism of the count-the-references-in-the biggest-books-in-the-library techniquedeariemenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4624586630299165335.post-6747150205441341552013-05-21T15:49:03.512+01:002013-05-21T15:49:03.512+01:00People leave to flee a creditor, the policeman or ...People leave to flee a creditor, the policeman or a wife. People leave to find cheap land or less competition. People leave because cousins have already left. It takes all sorts.deariemenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4624586630299165335.post-36469882748425658572013-05-20T17:07:32.699+01:002013-05-20T17:07:32.699+01:00Hi Jan,
I don't think that Herrnstein and Mur...Hi Jan,<br /><br />I don't think that Herrnstein and Murray are right that social stratification by IQ has increased tremendously. Somewhat, yes, but not tremendously. (I also suspect that in Victorian times it was easier for "outsiders" to enter science. Michael Faraday today would be dismissed. To some extent this compensated for the fact that many bright people did not go to university.)<br /><br />Anyway, if you are right, since 1980 - not since the Victorian era, but since 1980 - people with IQs over 130 have about halved. People with IQs over 160 are less common by a factor of three! This is hard to believe. I guess you could say that since 1980 dysgenics has been less severe, but this is only true for Scandinavia; in the US, it's probably worse.Elijah Armstronghttp://www.hedweb.com/elijahnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4624586630299165335.post-31379434288509846992013-05-20T10:37:44.438+01:002013-05-20T10:37:44.438+01:00@Frau Katze [great name!],
Indeed, many British em...@Frau Katze [great name!],<br />Indeed, many British emigrated to North America, Canada, South Africa, New Zealand, and Australia. However, if you study the IQ scores of the people in the colonies you will see that their scores are very similar to the scores in the UK. This suggest that over a longer period of time the immigrants were representative of British society. Jan te Nijenhuisnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4624586630299165335.post-68393518780586132042013-05-20T10:34:13.046+01:002013-05-20T10:34:13.046+01:00@Elijah Armstrong,
In Victorian times there was an...@Elijah Armstrong,<br />In Victorian times there was an explosion of creativity, but the amount of people that went to university or studied to become an engineer was very small. Research budgets were miniscule. People worked long hours to be able to put food on the table and there was little time left for discoveries. <br />However, in our time most people with the IQ to go to university also do. Western countries are astonishingly rich: there are billions of dollars and euros for research. There is much more spare time to spend on your hobbies and fascinations. So, shouldn't we have dozens more per capita big inventions than the Victorians?Jan te Nijenhuisnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4624586630299165335.post-30328727847586270232013-05-20T09:37:14.698+01:002013-05-20T09:37:14.698+01:00Great Britain experienced a huge outflow of people...Great Britain experienced a huge outflow of people emigrating to the North America and Australia once steamships were running reliably. I wonder if poor but bright people were more likely to leave. Annehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13041676434895574477noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4624586630299165335.post-72159744416035290522013-05-19T21:55:53.017+01:002013-05-19T21:55:53.017+01:00As I note in my response to Woodley et al. (pendin...As I note in my response to Woodley et al. (pending peer-review in PAID), -1.23 points per decade is extraordinarily high. As Herrnstein and Murray pointed out, 3 IQ points worth of decline means a 42% decline in people with 130+ IQs. Hence in the last 30 years, if Woodley et al. are right, the number of people who have IQs of over 130 (by 1980s standards) has about halved! I don't think this is possible, quite frankly.Elijah Armstronghttp://www.hedweb.com/elijahnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4624586630299165335.post-80839976269484534542013-05-19T20:07:48.086+01:002013-05-19T20:07:48.086+01:00http://deevybee.blogspot.co.uk/
It should be the f...http://deevybee.blogspot.co.uk/<br />It should be the first post on the list, with a good photo of Galton's labAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09320614837348759094noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4624586630299165335.post-32341634510129068922013-05-19T16:22:07.418+01:002013-05-19T16:22:07.418+01:00Where can I read Professor Rabbitt's article?
...Where can I read Professor Rabbitt's article?<br /><br />B.B.B.B.https://www.blogger.com/profile/00579154174541195967noreply@blogger.com