Re: Flynn Effect: IQ/G/etc... -- EDPR 7/8112 Adolescence Sec. 001 0500-0800 R

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 20:03:21 02/21/07 Wed
Author: Rachel Landau
Subject: Re: Flynn Effect: IQ/G/etc...
In reply to: Elizabeth Luster 's message, "Flynn Effect: IQ/G/etc..." on 20:30:29 02/17/07 Sat

I also find this debate interesting and the most prevalent theory is an overall "g" factor. I think genetics do play some role in intelligence, whether its a single factor or multiple ones. I like the idea of considering our improvements in intelligence as part of human development over time. Our brains have changed over the past couple thousand years and so why wouldn't the way we use our brain change as well. I think I remember hearing once that we use such a small portion of our brain, who says that we aren't still developing its capabilities naturally--- measured on the outside by intelligence tests. However, I also think that intelligence tests coincide with what society views as important, therefore, the more value society places on particular areas (such as verbal reasoning) the more we teach to that area. Therefore, wouldn't it be a natural progression that subsequent generations would improve in those areas because their parents' society (and therefore the parents, education system etc) valued it? Could we call this natural selection? why not! Since experiences clearly effect our intelligence on some level, why can't that be part of the way evolution is evolving? People evolving within generations as well as between them, right?

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[> Re: Flynn Effect: IQ/G/etc... -- Bradley Kovach, 21:58:07 02/21/07 Wed

Instead of comparing cacti and trees try using the analogy of seeds. Everyone is given a different amount of seeds to begin with, some just a few seeds, others handfuls. Now, the person with just a few seeds, even if they plant all their seeds and water them everyday are still only going to be able to fill a flower box. On the other hand, the person with handfuls of seeds has the potential to grow a forest, but only if they plant all of their seeds and put in the effort to feed and water them. But we still have to describe the Flynn effect. The Flynn Effect would be comparable to the genetic engineering and chemicals and hydroponic technologies that allow us to have crops and plants larger than ever before.

>Okay- I dont know why this is bothering me so much but
>I cant seem to quit pondering our class discussion
>about intelligence. It seems that the overall opinion
>is that there is a "g",an underlying intelligence,
>kinda like a tree with branches of different types of
>intelligence steming from "g". But then there is the
>Flynn Effect that we are attributing to exposure and
>not evolution because it has transpired too quickly?
>Exposure should have nothing to do with an underlying
>intelligence; this is genetics. Hear me out-I can
>have all the best nuturing, healthy diets, and
>opportunity in the world but if I am a cactus at
>creation-I will never be a 1000ft Sequoia. I may be
>the greatest cactus that ever lived but I am still a
>cactus. So, if genetics are the cause of g, which I
>truly believe, then Flynn Effect is the result of a
>rapidly occuring variation of natural selection. And
>if there is one area in which natural
>selection--survival of the fittest-- would benefit
>most--it would be intelligence. Besides, who says
>evolution cant evolve too? Any thoughts?

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]