IQ does have a strong genetic component, which in general terms means it
represents a trait that we all can/must have (in this case must) to a
varying degree. But there are considerable environmental effects. For
example biological siblings raised together have IQ's have a correlation
coefficient of .50, that's pretty good, but if they're raised in separate
environments the correlation drops to about .25. So we know for sure there
are biological and epigenetic effects. We know that things like low SES and
high density population with low access to resources and such have a
negative correlation with IQ.

I dont know of any rational educated thinker who believes that these
differences in IQ are because an individual is a minority. I know several
though who believe these differences can be accounted for by dispositional
factors stereotypical of minorities (e.g., they're just lazy), that is
symbolic racism and it breeds cultural paranoia. To say that the
differences observed in IQ are correlational we can say they are causal, no
research is causal. Actually most research is considered statistically
significant by showing your results weren't due to chance or error. Despite
this, and with no real dissent, many are now considering those
environmental factors to ve the cause of the differences, which is pretty
clear. So I agree with your sentiments.

I would be interested in hearing more about the connections you're
referencing between EEG of eye movements and perception of social threats
if you have some sources!

Regards,

Nicholas G. Lattanzio, Psy.D.

On Wed, Dec 1, 2021, 6:53 PM Jamie D <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> *CAUTION: *This email originated from outside of JMU. Do not click links
> or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is
> safe.
> ------------------------------
>
> Let's say, I as a white man with small, sweaty hands, wanted to be a top
> basketball player, or a rap artist.
>
> It could be done.
>
> The challenge isn't getting good at basketball itself, but breaking out of
> my normal identity, into one that would test me inside and out.
>
> Free of such tests, it would be a smooth process.
>
> Math isn't difficult.
> It's boring without sufficient incentive.
>
> I contend that when a minority sits down to practice math or science, they
> hear a discouraging voice from both sides - one about tribal loyalty, and
> another a threat not to enter the game of the top tiers.
>
> How to test it?
>
> Put a camera to watch the eyes of (and EEG device onto their heads)
> various people to practice things outside their conventional identity.
>
> Eye movements indicative of processing social threat can be measured with
> eeg measurements, and we can prove IQ is sociocultural, not biological.
>
> We needn't lie about the data, but clarify it.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ############################
>
> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
> mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the
> following link:
> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>

############################

To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list:
write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
or click the following link:
http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1