- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Some thoughts on IQ
Posted on 8/1/25 at 4:48 pm to Ping Pong
Posted on 8/1/25 at 4:48 pm to Ping Pong
So true. I've loved history my whole life except in a history class. You can't learn anything with any depth with the amount of time they spend on it. We spent like 2 days covering napoleon Bonaparte in the 7th grade. You don't learn any nuances. It's all black and white. Abraham Lincoln and MLK were taught as godlike figures but then you read about them and their terrible. Any objective look at history of the past 2 thousand years would center around Jesus but he's not taught.
2
Posted on 8/1/25 at 4:48 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
and an impressive drug habit.
Oddly Glenn Loury had an impressive drug habit and I somehow forgot to mention he is possibly one of the most significant data points in Nature vs Nurture in his own life.
In addition on being one of the worlds best and most rigorous economists, he is
quote:
the Merton P. Stoltz Professor of the Social Sciences at Brown University, where he has taught since 2005 and is also as a professor of economics. At the age of 33, Loury became the first African American professor of economics at Harvard University to gain tenure.
However,
quote:
Loury was born on September 3, 1948, in the South Side of Chicago, Illinois, growing up in a redlined neighborhood. Before going to college he fathered two children, and supported them with a job in a printing plant. When he wasn't working he took classes at Southeast Junior College, where he won a scholarship to study at Northwestern University.
In 1972, he received a Bachelor of Arts degree in mathematics from Northwestern University. He then received a Ph.D. in economics from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in 1976, writing his dissertation, "Essays in the Theory of the Distribution of Income", under the supervision of Nobel laureate Robert M. Solow. At MIT he met his future wife, Linda Datcher Loury.
quote:
In 1987, Loury was under consideration to be an Undersecretary of Education in the Reagan administration. He withdrew from consideration on June 1, three days before citing personal reasons.
Loury was arrested for drug possession in December 1987, six months after his assault and battery charges on Pamela Foster.
He did much of his early work while having a drug habit as he discusses in some of his work.
He's a fascinating data point who can speak with his own voice and insight.
Posted on 8/1/25 at 5:13 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
but HOW/WHY?!
Why does Terence have a significantly higher IQ than his brothers? What caused that?
You know the answer. It just makes you uncomfortable
Posted on 8/1/25 at 5:14 pm to 4cubbies
quote:um. This one is EASY to explain. Are you being serious here?
My husband and I both have brown eyes. 2/3 of our kids have blue eyes.
Genes are weird
Posted on 8/1/25 at 5:20 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
I don't buy the claim that black parents across all education and income levels don't read to their kids.
As I told you before. Being uncomfortable with facts doesn't change anything. On the whole black parents take far less interest in their children's education then the parents of other races. Obviously there will be individual exceptions but that doesn't change the overall reality no matter how much it bothers you
Posted on 8/1/25 at 5:21 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
I don't buy the claim that black parents across all education and income levels don't read to their kids.
Yesterday was meet the teacher day at my kids school. (an IB school because I've been leveraging all the IQ increasing hacks for them since they were born). My son's teacher is black. While we were chatting, she specifically named "not reading to their kids" as one of the things many poor parents fail to do that hurts their kids. She has a son in kindergarten. I can assure you that she reads to him.
I have black mom friends that I know read to their kids. That's such a ridiculous claim to make.
Of course there are parents across all races who don't read to their kids. Even in my house, on nights that I have class, my husband puts the kids to bed and they get to watch an episode or two of Bluey before they close their eyes. On nights when I'm home, I read to them. It's a non-negotiable. My husband is white. I wouldn't extrapolate that to say no white men read to their kids.
OK lets do some math:
100 black parents of black kids, average kid IQ 100
Reading to kids +10 IQ
Not Reading to kids -10 IQ
75% read to kids, 25% dont.
75*110+25*90
Average Group IQ 105
But what if 90% of white people read to their kids
That's an average IQ of 108
A 3 point gap has occurred, and 3 out of 4 black parents you meet will have read to their kids.
Now look at the sea of other things such as drug use, alcohol use.
How many 3 IQ point losses can a society take before they get to 90.
There are millions who do read do their kids, but our anecdotes don't make up for statistical data
You may not like my examples, but they make a point how cultural failures to hit these easy wins in high enough numbers will start chipping away.
But wait it's 91%
quote:
91% of White children and 89% of children of Two or more races had a family member read to them three or more times in the past week, compared to 77% of Hispanic and 75% of Black children
And
quote:
Parental Interactions & Home Environment Stimulation:
Impact: Rich language exposure ("word gap"), responsive parenting, reading to children, access to books and educational toys, encouragement of curiosity and exploration, emotional security. This is arguably the most powerful "Floor" factor in early childhood.
Effect on Floor: Directly shapes neural pathways, develops cognitive skills (language, problem-solving, executive functions), fosters emotional regulation, and instills a love for learning.
Estimated Change: Can account for a +10 to +20 IQ point difference between highly stimulating vs. cognitively impoverished home environments.
Posted on 8/1/25 at 5:23 pm to Grumpy Nemesis
quote:
um. This one is EASY to explain. Are you being serious here?
.. Fruit flies was a fascinating part of HS biology class.
Posted on 8/1/25 at 6:18 pm to Narax
Yes. Obv there are recessive genes. I, too, graduated from high school.
Posted on 8/1/25 at 6:25 pm to Narax
quote:
but our anecdotes don't make up for statistical data
No statistical data was presented.
This was the claim:
They claimed culture was the most likely factor. Specifically that black parents in America do not read to (or even talk to) their children the way other races do when they are very young. They said this cut across income levels and education levels.
You posted statistics that indicate most black kids had a family read to them three or more times a week. So you confirmed my suspicion the original claim was malarkey.
Posted on 8/1/25 at 6:39 pm to anc
When Stanford and Binet first created their IQ test, they were looking for tool to identify the bright and alert children that they had observed. It evolved over time and is pretty good at identifying bright and alert people that correlate with high beta waves in their brain.
The innovators and creators have both high beta and high alpha. That's why they are smart problem solvers and dreamers.
The innovators and creators have both high beta and high alpha. That's why they are smart problem solvers and dreamers.
Posted on 8/1/25 at 6:45 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
You posted statistics that indicate most black kids had a family read to them three or more times a week. So you confirmed my suspicion the original claim was malarkey.
No, you seem to think that as long as 75% read to their kids that they won't shift the entire IQ south.
It's still significantly less than white people and Asians. You want to believe that it's not a cultural problem, but if 25% of Black parents cant be bothered to read to their kids, if 70% of black children in America are born without a biological father in the house (to 28% White and 12% Asian).
Those significant gaps in behaviors are going to reflect in IQ, and employment, and income, and wealth.
This whole time you want to pretend that people like me "make up stories" (I don't, ever), or that you are free to interpret data however you please to preserve your beliefs (You can't).
Posted on 8/1/25 at 7:10 pm to Auburn1968
quote:
The innovators and creators have both high beta and high alpha.
This sent me down a very enlightening rabbit hole. Thanks for posting it.
Posted on 8/1/25 at 7:14 pm to Narax
quote:
No, you seem to think that as long as 75% read to their kids that they won't shift the entire IQ south.
No. I just took issue with the claim that virtually no black parents read to their kids.
quote:
You want to believe that it's not a cultural problem, but if 25% of Black parents cant be bothered to read to their kids,
I think it’s a culture of poverty/trashiness problem, which correlates with being low IQ parents.
quote:
This whole time you want to pretend that people like me "make up stories" (I don't, ever), or that you are free to interpret data however you please to preserve your beliefs (You can't).
I really don’t know where this is coming from. I thought we were having a nice discussion.
Posted on 8/1/25 at 7:41 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
I don't buy the claim that black parents across all education and income levels don't read to their kids.
quote:
No. I just took issue with the claim that virtually no black parents read to their kids.
You are misrepresenting what he said.
quote:
They claimed culture was the most likely factor. Specifically that black parents in America do not read to (or even talk to) their children the way other races do when they are very young. They said this cut across income levels and education levels.
No part of that said most. You interpreted it in a way not meant by the authors.
That was why I brought up the large gap that can be created by even 25% of people acting in a way that hinders their children.
And we know there is a significant parenting gap for African Americans as a population.
quote:
I think it’s a culture of poverty/trashiness problem, which correlates with being low IQ parents.
Yes we know you think the poor are dumb and trashy. There are many examples of very moral non trashy poor people.
Why are you so interested in forcing poverty to be a cause of low morality.
What part of your world view requires it?
quote:
I really don’t know where this is coming from. I thought we were having a nice discussion.
Are you saying you accidentally assumed the study meant all black people?
Posted on 8/1/25 at 7:47 pm to Narax
quote:
Reading to kids +10 IQ
Not Reading to kids -10 IQ
So far as we can tell, IQ is innate. It can't be improved, only harmed (typically via nutrition/environment).
Education can help you use your IQ more effectively, but you are still limited, at least intellectually, by your IQ.
This post was edited on 8/1/25 at 7:48 pm
Posted on 8/1/25 at 7:58 pm to Azkiger
quote:
So far as we can tell, IQ is innate. It can't be improved, only harmed (typically via nutrition/environment).
Education can help you use your IQ more effectively, but you are still limited, at least intellectually, by your IQ.
Semantics on things that are unprovable.
Either everyone is under-performing their IQ, or IQ can be improved through good brain health.
Either we way have thousands of studies showing that IQ scores can increase overtime.
IQ is an artificial construct, if you pin IQ as innate you have to then assume the scores are never accurate to what a person's actual IQ is.
If you pin the scores as accurate then IQ changes.
Logically both cannot be pinned as we see scores move up.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7709590/
Now if intelligence can be increased is a completely separate and complex question.
Posted on 8/1/25 at 8:09 pm to Narax
quote:
No part of that said most.
Right. Black parents don’t read to their kids. You are claiming that the author meant something entirely different than what he wrote. No part of that said “some.”
quote:In your opinion, did the Obamas read to their young kids? Do you think Glenn Loury did? Or could this gap be pronounced by other factors like SES?
And we know there is a significant parenting gap for African Americans as a population.
quote:
Yes we know you think the poor are dumb and trashy.
Strawman. Unless you think all black people are dumb and trashy?
Or are you just denying that SES has any impact on anything at all? Impoverished and affluent people are equal in every measurable way outside of household income?
quote:
Are you saying you accidentally assumed the study meant all black people?
I didn’t assume anything. I read the same words you did except I didn’t interpret them for hidden meanings. I just read them and took them at face value.
This post was edited on 8/1/25 at 8:12 pm
Posted on 8/1/25 at 8:35 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
Right. Black parents don’t read to their kids. You are claiming that the author meant something entirely different than what he wrote. No part of that said “some.”
quote:
Specifically that black parents in America do not read to (or even talk to) their children the way other races do when they are very young.
As a group, compared to in the way that other races do.
Do you really actually and truly think the authors meant something so completely racist? Or is this an avoidance method?
quote:
In your opinion, did the Obamas read to their young kids? Do you think Glenn Loury did?
Yes they were likely in the 75% that do.
quote:
Or could this gap be pronounced by other factors like SES?
SES is not a factor, it's an increased likelihood of other negative factors.
People going to a bar get drunk often, is it the bar getting them drunk or is it the alcohol.
quote:
Strawman. Unless you think all black people are dumb and trashy?
You sure seemed to have said you think all poor people are dumb and trashy.
quote:
I think it’s a culture of poverty/trashiness problem, which correlates with being low IQ parents.
I mean isn't that the same as saying...
quote:
Specifically that black parents in America do not read to (or even talk to) their children the way other races do when they are very young. They said this cut across income levels and education levels.
hmm... so you didnt mean all people in poverty are trashy and low IQ...
But you can't give others the same benefit of the doubt with out trying to whip them with the you're a racist whip.
By the way, if you think I think Glenn and John are in any way trashy... I think you need to reconsider everything in your life that got you to that point.
quote:
Or are you just denying that SES has any impact on anything at all? Impoverished and affluent people are equal in every measurable way outside of household income?
SES to note as I mentioned about the bar makes you more likely to statistically get drunk but it itself is not what makes you drunk.
quote:
I didn’t assume anything. I read the same words you did except I didn’t interpret them for hidden meanings. I just read them and took them at face value.
No... you very much did, there was a missing word all. you read it as the most evil possible interpretation. Would it have not been in the news if it had been so?
So now answer this.
Do you think all cultures value education the same?
This post was edited on 8/1/25 at 8:59 pm
Posted on 8/1/25 at 8:51 pm to 4cubbies
quote:Except, he DID post numbers to prove it wasn't malarky. Are you retarded?
You posted statistics that indicate most black kids had a family read to them three or more times a week. So you confirmed my suspicion the original claim was malarkey.
Posted on 8/1/25 at 8:58 pm to Narax
quote:
Semantics on things that are unprovable.
Either everyone is under-performing their IQ, or IQ can be improved through good brain health.
I don't think it's this complicated.
I've said it before, but, I'll repeat. Do NOT confuse IQ, the thing, with IQ, the measurement tool.
IQ the thing is how well your brain works. It's actual capabilities. Our tools that we use to attempt to measure this thing, while certainly pretty good, are still trying to measure something VERY indirectly. Since we have no tools to literally measure how well the machinery of the brain is working, we're left with tools that ATTEMPT to measure without requiring massive education but, there's only so much you can do in that area.
So, this ends up with the measurement tool "appearing" to show improving IQ when all it's doing is measuring improvement the potential preparation for an IQ test.
Now, to be sure, you can likely do stupid shite to DAMAGE the machinery of the brain and, I suspect good nutrition and other environmental factors can allow the machinery to work at its best level. But, this is STILL a case of the same machinery. Kind of like you and I might BOTH have old Mustang 3.0 engines. They have the same "IQ(horsepower)". But, I did oil changes every 5000 miles and you don't know what an oil change is.
Bottom line, you get the machine you get. If you get a 3 cylinder chevy chevette engine, all the oil changes in the world aren't going to result in 0-60 in less than a month. LOL
Page 22 of 33
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News