Genetic literacy

[antagon]

So maybe the correct word is intelligence rather than literacy. Either way, I beg to differ that there is indeed research being done in that area, and have posted links to it.

i could fillet any 'research' aiming to isolate intelligence from genetic transfer from what intelligence is gained over a lifetime. i'd like to see that joke. might you produce a link on this thread?

In biology today, epigenetics has two closely related meanings:

Epigenetics Epigenetic Theory Gene Biology Dna Development

Excerpt (the second meaning):

The study of heritable changes in gene function that occur without a change in the sequence of nuclear DNA. This includes the study of how environmental factors affecting a parent can result in changes in the way genes are expressed in the offspring (see Waterland citation).

The Epigenome learns from its experiences

Genetics and Intelligence: What's New?


There's a ton of research going on. I'll let you Google your own, since it appears very few accept this possibility and, frankly, I'm bored with the subject until some breakthrough announcement is made.

im familiar with epigenetics.

what epigenetic mechanism has been determined to affect change in genes related to intelligence? what genes, in fact, have been related to intelligence, and if such are known, are their phenotypes mapped? granted these bits are sorted, how is the effect of epigenetic influence imparted on a genome with preference to smarts?

while starving parents may impart an epigenetic marker, what in the nuance that separates functional folks' intelligence and these black people's intelligence will act as a transcription factor? have they determined a factor which responds to time spent reading over time sitting down playing video games in a tenement, or listening to rap music - to roll out a stereotype you'll gobble up?

that's before we even get to a method to credibly judge the effect of genetics on intelligence in humans. of course the biggest contributor is the application of what intelligence we have.

i thought you were going to produce a link to an argument which supports your theory. you just conject, 'but there's epigenetics'

 

[MaggieMae]

i could fillet any 'research' aiming to isolate intelligence from genetic transfer from what intelligence is gained over a lifetime. i'd like to see that joke. might you produce a link on this thread?

In biology today, epigenetics has two closely related meanings:

Epigenetics Epigenetic Theory Gene Biology Dna Development

Excerpt (the second meaning):

The study of heritable changes in gene function that occur without a change in the sequence of nuclear DNA. This includes the study of how environmental factors affecting a parent can result in changes in the way genes are expressed in the offspring (see Waterland citation).

The Epigenome learns from its experiences

Genetics and Intelligence: What's New?


There's a ton of research going on. I'll let you Google your own, since it appears very few accept this possibility and, frankly, I'm bored with the subject until some breakthrough announcement is made.

im familiar with epigenetics.

what epigenetic mechanism has been determined to affect change in genes related to intelligence? what genes, in fact, have been related to intelligence, and if such are known, are their phenotypes mapped? granted these bits are sorted, how is the effect of epigenetic influence imparted on a genome with preference to smarts?

while starving parents may impart an epigenetic marker, what in the nuance that separates functional folks' intelligence and these black people's intelligence will act as a transcription factor? have they determined a factor which responds to time spent reading over time sitting down playing video games in a tenement, or listening to rap music - to roll out a stereotype you'll gobble up?

that's before we even get to a method to credibly judge the effect of genetics on intelligence in humans. of course the biggest contributor is the application of what intelligence we have.

i thought you were going to produce a link to an argument which supports your theory. you just conject, 'but there's epigenetics'

You asked for research. I don't have time to Google tens of thousands of pages looking for an answer that would satisfy you, but I can assure you I didn't invent that theory all by myself, since I'm no scientist. To me, as I've said over and over and over and over again, it only makes sense to this layperson that if genetics control physical characteristics which DO change with time, there is no reason to believe they do not ALSO control mental characteristics--all based on evolving physical AND intellectual association.

Ironically, there have been studies on genetics playing a role in IQ, but sadly as soon as they are published, get attacked as being subject to racial profiling. You can find those studies also online. As I said, I'm not the brainchild. If you read through all the posts here, you'll also see that I'm accused of the same thing.

 

[JBeukema]

You asked for research. I don't have time to Google tens of thousands of pages looking for an answer

So Mags is saying she's got nothin'?

 

[antagon]

In biology today, epigenetics has two closely related meanings:

Epigenetics Epigenetic Theory Gene Biology Dna Development

Excerpt (the second meaning):


The Epigenome learns from its experiences

Genetics and Intelligence: What's New?


There's a ton of research going on. I'll let you Google your own, since it appears very few accept this possibility and, frankly, I'm bored with the subject until some breakthrough announcement is made.

im familiar with epigenetics.

what epigenetic mechanism has been determined to affect change in genes related to intelligence? what genes, in fact, have been related to intelligence, and if such are known, are their phenotypes mapped? granted these bits are sorted, how is the effect of epigenetic influence imparted on a genome with preference to smarts?

while starving parents may impart an epigenetic marker, what in the nuance that separates functional folks' intelligence and these black people's intelligence will act as a transcription factor? have they determined a factor which responds to time spent reading over time sitting down playing video games in a tenement, or listening to rap music - to roll out a stereotype you'll gobble up?

that's before we even get to a method to credibly judge the effect of genetics on intelligence in humans. of course the biggest contributor is the application of what intelligence we have.

i thought you were going to produce a link to an argument which supports your theory. you just conject, 'but there's epigenetics'

You asked for research. I don't have time to Google tens of thousands of pages looking for an answer that would satisfy you, but I can assure you I didn't invent that theory all by myself, since I'm no scientist. To me, as I've said over and over and over and over again, it only makes sense to this layperson that if genetics control physical characteristics which DO change with time, there is no reason to believe they do not ALSO control mental characteristics--all based on evolving physical AND intellectual association.

Ironically, there have been studies on genetics playing a role in IQ, but sadly as soon as they are published, get attacked as being subject to racial profiling. You can find those studies also online. As I said, I'm not the brainchild. If you read through all the posts here, you'll also see that I'm accused of the same thing.

there's certainly a connection with genes and intelligence sufficient to make humans the smartest creatures on the planet. among us, perhaps, there's some genetics which could relate to brain size and all. there are certainly studies which have made links to black people and brain size. they are often dismissed as racist in peer review, because they elude scientific standards to make their point, and then claim to have vindicated a racist hypothesis. that the bell curve's science failed to find a single black genius and there has been a few at the local mensas in three different states is a case in point.

have you fallen victim to some of the logic in these racist studies, then sympathized with the victim role these 'researchers' played when their studies did not hold water in peer review?

your hypothesis is even more tenuous. you claim that there's some evolutionary forces at hand which make black people, in the course of a half-millenia, less intelligent than white people.

then, there is still the issue of resolving intelligence without any social input to influence it. in the context of literacy, how can you determine this capacity has genetic roots? like i said earlier, is there a human without any disorder who cant read by virtue of his genome?

before i would subscribe to any shit like that, i would have to know of a couple.

 

[antagon]

You asked for research. I don't have time to Google tens of thousands of pages looking for an answer

So Mags is saying she's got nothin'?

lets's be fair here. there's always the hot air.

 

[MaggieMae]

You asked for research. I don't have time to Google tens of thousands of pages looking for an answer

So Mags is saying she's got nothin'?

There are at least 3 threads on this subject, thanks to Allie Babba saying about the same thing, and a lot of information was posted in each. But as I said, I've moved on. If anyone cares to, there are plenty of articles and you can draw your own conclusion.

 

[MaggieMae]

im familiar with epigenetics.

what epigenetic mechanism has been determined to affect change in genes related to intelligence? what genes, in fact, have been related to intelligence, and if such are known, are their phenotypes mapped? granted these bits are sorted, how is the effect of epigenetic influence imparted on a genome with preference to smarts?

while starving parents may impart an epigenetic marker, what in the nuance that separates functional folks' intelligence and these black people's intelligence will act as a transcription factor? have they determined a factor which responds to time spent reading over time sitting down playing video games in a tenement, or listening to rap music - to roll out a stereotype you'll gobble up?

that's before we even get to a method to credibly judge the effect of genetics on intelligence in humans. of course the biggest contributor is the application of what intelligence we have.

i thought you were going to produce a link to an argument which supports your theory. you just conject, 'but there's epigenetics'

You asked for research. I don't have time to Google tens of thousands of pages looking for an answer that would satisfy you, but I can assure you I didn't invent that theory all by myself, since I'm no scientist. To me, as I've said over and over and over and over again, it only makes sense to this layperson that if genetics control physical characteristics which DO change with time, there is no reason to believe they do not ALSO control mental characteristics--all based on evolving physical AND intellectual association.

Ironically, there have been studies on genetics playing a role in IQ, but sadly as soon as they are published, get attacked as being subject to racial profiling. You can find those studies also online. As I said, I'm not the brainchild. If you read through all the posts here, you'll also see that I'm accused of the same thing.

there's certainly a connection with genes and intelligence sufficient to make humans the smartest creatures on the planet. among us, perhaps, there's some genetics which could relate to brain size and all. there are certainly studies which have made links to black people and brain size. they are often dismissed as racist in peer review, because they elude scientific standards to make their point, and then claim to have vindicated a racist hypothesis. that the bell curve's science failed to find a single black genius and there has been a few at the local mensas in three different states is a case in point.

have you fallen victim to some of the logic in these racist studies, then sympathized with the victim role these 'researchers' played when their studies did not hold water in peer review?

your hypothesis is even more tenuous. you claim that there's some evolutionary forces at hand which make black people, in the course of a half-millenia, less intelligent than white people.

then, there is still the issue of resolving intelligence without any social input to influence it. in the context of literacy, how can you determine this capacity has genetic roots? like i said earlier, is there a human without any disorder who cant read by virtue of his genome?

before i would subscribe to any shit like that, i would have to know of a couple.

I'm not "subscribing" to it either; just suggesting that it's a possibility. Actually, what prompted my curiosity at all is the fact that inner city blacks (and Puerto Ricans and some whites too in seriously depressed areas) seem incapable of pulling THEMSELVES out from under an unending cycle of illiteracy/poverty/crime/drugs/lack of interest in anything else.
Why?

 

[AllieBaba]

Because they're genetically stupid, of course!

 

[antagon]

i look to nurture ahead, far ahead, of nature for answers to what are invariably socio-economic issues. furthermore, intelligence doesn't play as big a role in that mix among players like ambition and parental investment.

who really pulls themselves out of anything, without any external input? at some point, someone's got to impart that there's more to life than what they're in and indicate a path to said bounty. then there's an onus on discipline, patience and perseverance to navigate that path, failing many people without these values in their local or family ethic. racial ethic, even - however on lines of the cultures attached, rather than the genes. change the genes like your 'some whites', and the same culture affects the same stagnated rut. change the culture, and black men and women's genes suffice to facilitate prosperity.

you've not had any actual encounters with the people you generalize, maggie?

 

[MaggieMae]

i look to nurture ahead, far ahead, of nature for answers to what are invariably socio-economic issues. furthermore, intelligence doesn't play as big a role in that mix among players like ambition and parental investment.

who really pulls themselves out of anything, without any external input? at some point, someone's got to impart that there's more to life than what they're in and indicate a path to said bounty. then there's an onus on discipline, patience and perseverance to navigate that path, failing many people without these values in their local or family ethic. racial ethic, even - however on lines of the cultures attached, rather than the genes. change the genes like your 'some whites', and the same culture affects the same stagnated rut. change the culture, and black men and women's genes suffice to facilitate prosperity.

you've not had any actual encounters with the people you generalize, maggie?

No, not personally, but I've agonized for years as I watch money thrown at people as if money were the only answer. Somehow, some way, a re-education of people who are stuck in such cycles needs to happen. I suppose what got me going with a rant of sorts is that I had just watched the movie "Precious" which, if you can get past the horrors dramatized therein, the real story was about sorely needed alternative educational opportunities since the public school system is such a dismal failure in those communities. And then I got to wondering since this has been going on for so long, maybe it isn't possible. Maybe too many, not born illiterate, have simply been dumbed-down over the generations.

 

[antagon]

i look to nurture ahead, far ahead, of nature for answers to what are invariably socio-economic issues. furthermore, intelligence doesn't play as big a role in that mix among players like ambition and parental investment.

who really pulls themselves out of anything, without any external input? at some point, someone's got to impart that there's more to life than what they're in and indicate a path to said bounty. then there's an onus on discipline, patience and perseverance to navigate that path, failing many people without these values in their local or family ethic. racial ethic, even - however on lines of the cultures attached, rather than the genes. change the genes like your 'some whites', and the same culture affects the same stagnated rut. change the culture, and black men and women's genes suffice to facilitate prosperity.

you've not had any actual encounters with the people you generalize, maggie?

No, not personally, but I've agonized for years as I watch money thrown at people as if money were the only answer. Somehow, some way, a re-education of people who are stuck in such cycles needs to happen. I suppose what got me going with a rant of sorts is that I had just watched the movie "Precious" which, if you can get past the horrors dramatized therein, the real story was about sorely needed alternative educational opportunities since the public school system is such a dismal failure in those communities. And then I got to wondering since this has been going on for so long, maybe it isn't possible. Maybe too many, not born illiterate, have simply been dumbed-down over the generations.

well, everyone is born illiterate.

i've grown up in some bullshit in los angeles, and could say that education is just the beginning. above and beyond trying to teach people how to add and subtract and read, the public education system needs to quit washing its hands of the role that parents play in the process of education, and actively work to indoctrinate young (i mean primary education) students into the process of learning and being a functional part of society in their stead.

i dont believe there is any effort to do this whatsoever, now, and that if they did so, even at the expense of teaching other lessons, the effectiveness of education would be significantly enhanced. this should roll out into all public education, IMHO. i dont have any children, but the impression that i get around young children of all demographics is that they present an opportunity to affect a change in the cycles you point out. all children acclimate to the world at an incredible pace, which we fail through bad/no parenting, lack of investment (to include time, foremost), and poor education. by the time kids are 8 or 9, i think that they are virtually spoken for, with respect to their potential success, where 5 years earlier, the sky was the limit.

perspectives such as yours, but held by these kid's parents and teachers instill a mentality of relegation to the cycle they were born in. i was 10 when we moved to a real ghetto in LA. because my mother steered clear of government assistance, and invested her single income in persisting in private ed for my brother and i, we suffered more economic depression than my friends. brokest kid on the block - definitely the brokest kid at my school. Notwithstanding, an alternative culture placing an emphasis on education, and above all discipline, allowed me to outperform all the kids in my neighborhood and most at school.

i caution deriving generalizations from movies. the vast majority of people in depressed neighborhoods work and want best for their kids, they affect upward mobility for themselves and for their families. it's not what is portrayed in media or what can be extrapolated from statistics. There are some dysfunctions culturally and systemically which fail to turn over prosperity from our investment there.

there's much to be dissatisfied with regarding white middle class education values, which produce results not indicating full exploitation of the favor their schools and environment offer in deference to my roots. perhaps, if you are familiar with that environment, you could drum theories on those wastes of investment.

maybe, too, with literacy rates in the 99th percentile, that your obsession with illiteracy is a misplacement of your concern for america.

 

[AllieBaba]

Excellent post.

Whoosh, just went over Mags' head.

 

[MaggieMae]

i look to nurture ahead, far ahead, of nature for answers to what are invariably socio-economic issues. furthermore, intelligence doesn't play as big a role in that mix among players like ambition and parental investment.

who really pulls themselves out of anything, without any external input? at some point, someone's got to impart that there's more to life than what they're in and indicate a path to said bounty. then there's an onus on discipline, patience and perseverance to navigate that path, failing many people without these values in their local or family ethic. racial ethic, even - however on lines of the cultures attached, rather than the genes. change the genes like your 'some whites', and the same culture affects the same stagnated rut. change the culture, and black men and women's genes suffice to facilitate prosperity.

you've not had any actual encounters with the people you generalize, maggie?

No, not personally, but I've agonized for years as I watch money thrown at people as if money were the only answer. Somehow, some way, a re-education of people who are stuck in such cycles needs to happen. I suppose what got me going with a rant of sorts is that I had just watched the movie "Precious" which, if you can get past the horrors dramatized therein, the real story was about sorely needed alternative educational opportunities since the public school system is such a dismal failure in those communities. And then I got to wondering since this has been going on for so long, maybe it isn't possible. Maybe too many, not born illiterate, have simply been dumbed-down over the generations.

well, everyone is born illiterate.

i've grown up in some bullshit in los angeles, and could say that education is just the beginning. above and beyond trying to teach people how to add and subtract and read, the public education system needs to quit washing its hands of the role that parents play in the process of education, and actively work to indoctrinate young (i mean primary education) students into the process of learning and being a functional part of society in their stead.

i dont believe there is any effort to do this whatsoever, now, and that if they did so, even at the expense of teaching other lessons, the effectiveness of education would be significantly enhanced. this should roll out into all public education, IMHO. i dont have any children, but the impression that i get around young children of all demographics is that they present an opportunity to affect a change in the cycles you point out. all children acclimate to the world at an incredible pace, which we fail through bad/no parenting, lack of investment (to include time, foremost), and poor education. by the time kids are 8 or 9, i think that they are virtually spoken for, with respect to their potential success, where 5 years earlier, the sky was the limit.

perspectives such as yours, but held by these kid's parents and teachers instill a mentality of relegation to the cycle they were born in. i was 10 when we moved to a real ghetto in LA. because my mother steered clear of government assistance, and invested her single income in persisting in private ed for my brother and i, we suffered more economic depression than my friends. brokest kid on the block - definitely the brokest kid at my school. Notwithstanding, an alternative culture placing an emphasis on education, and above all discipline, allowed me to outperform all the kids in my neighborhood and most at school.

i caution deriving generalizations from movies. the vast majority of people in depressed neighborhoods work and want best for their kids, they affect upward mobility for themselves and for their families. it's not what is portrayed in media or what can be extrapolated from statistics. There are some dysfunctions culturally and systemically which fail to turn over prosperity from our investment there.

there's much to be dissatisfied with regarding white middle class education values, which produce results not indicating full exploitation of the favor their schools and environment offer in deference to my roots. perhaps, if you are familiar with that environment, you could drum theories on those wastes of investment.

maybe, too, with literacy rates in the 99th percentile, that your obsession with illiteracy is a misplacement of your concern for america.

Your story is both sad and inspirational. I do appreciate your logical (and civil) reactions, and yes, I am very very concerned with America's future which MUST center around education. While we still have a good crop that can carry us into the near future without too many bruises inflicted by better educated competitors, it's beyond the next decade that will be the real test of our ability to remain a super power.

 

[antagon]

not a sad story!

mom's doing ok. life's easier with reasonably successful sons. hard work's paid off in the last couple decades for us all.

its hard to say what the formula going into the next 20 years is for the nation. education never fails its virtues, if not for application, for the process alone.