So iq is partly heritable/genetic and partly environmental. If someone raises their IQ during their life and then has a child will the "base" probable heritable/genetic IQ of that child be higher?
>>16999220>If someone raises their IQ during their life and then has a child will the "base" probable heritable/genetic IQ of that child be higher?That is Lamarckismand not how selection works.
>>16999220IQ has a genetic component and an environmental component. Only the genetic component is heritable.Though raising your IQ via environmental factors could increase the likelihood of you providing a good environment for your children.
>>16999220Breeders equation is R = h^2S."For example, imagine that a plant breeder is involved in a selective breeding project with the aim of increasing the number of kernels per ear of corn. For the sake of argument, let us assume that the average ear of corn in the parent generation has 100 kernels. Let us also assume that the selected parents produce corn with an average of 120 kernels per ear. If h2 equals 0.5, then the next generation will produce corn with an average of 0.5(120−100) = 10 additional kernels per ear. Therefore, the total number of kernels per ear of corn will equal, on average, 110."In terms of IQ, what matters is the additive heritability, not the broad-sense heritability, because only the additive heritability (narrow-sense heritability) gets passed down.
>>16999220If you trained your genes to pass the test, then yes.
>>16999222It's Neo-Lamarckism and "selection" is Darwinist fantasy."Use it or lose it" is literally commonsensically observable. The answer to OP's question is that progenitors who habitually utilize intensive mental functions will encode the perceived need for it upon their own inheritable genetics which will predispose their offspring toward the same or more.Two-legged walking doesn't come out of thin air. It comes from the creatures doing it so often that their bodies progressively accomodate the function, which, like evidently all things about the body, becomes encoded genetically.If instincts from repetitive and/or intense stimuli become encoded genetically, as per their heritability in the absense of any other rational explanation for such autonomous behaviors and reactions, then there's no actual telling where the limit is as far as what else can be.
>>16999253Are you trolling?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutation_rate
I took an IQ test and scored a 103, then I took a mild stimulant and scored a 118, so I'm sure if I took it a step further, possibly by mixing methamphetamine and LSD, I could score even higher.
>>16999220black parentsblack skinwhite parents white skingenetics x environment = outcomeif genetics = 25 and env = 50, you get 1250 if genetics = 90 and env = 50, you get 4500simple
>>16999319you can only crack 140+ with ketamin these days, they fixed the tests
>>16999346>genetics x environmentOrthogonal genetic and environmental effects are additive, not multiplicative (sum of squares or variance). Read "Making Sense of Heritability" by Neven Sesardic.
>>16999319That difference is only ~2.14 SD (Reliability = 0.86, SD of test-retest = 15 * SQRT(2 * 0.14) = 15 * 0.469 = ~7 points), which is barely significant (two-sided p ~0.0162), and n = 2.You didn't properly control for other factors. You'd need to average out systematic error across lots of people using a twin, sibling, or randomized control design.https://gwern.net/doc/genetics/heritable/correlation/2022-vandijk.pdf
>>16999359I will take all the drugs and become omniscient.>>16999373Thanks for the insight, though IQ isn't the sole measure of baseline intelligence, anyway, just an assessment of certain functions, so even though my skills were personally improved by my ability to focus properly and analyze more systematically, it probably won't translate well to other people.Regardless, there's probably ethical considerations to performing a case study by giving people meth.
This thread is insane. Do any of you read? I don't even want to share nobody is sharing besides the OP
>>16999319Really? You found a psychologist willing to give you two proctored IQ tests in the same day because you wanted to experiment with stimulants?
Why is it whenever IQ is mentioned, invariably every anon comes out of the woodwork to show off their score?
>>16999693If it were two different tests, then you'd have to deal with the slight construct invalidity between the two tests (IQ tests are imperfect measures of g; see "just one g," "still just one g," and "what is a good g?"), so it wouldn't be a good experiment anyway.
>>16999276>No argumentConcession denied, it feels wrong to rape you like that
>>17000729I don't argue with creationists, either.
>>16999220Entirely possible because a) epigenetics b) appropriate nutrition for maintaining high IQ being available in a high IQ woman.
>>17001056>epigeneticsEpigenetic effects (which come from DNA methylation and histone rotation) are not transmitted from parent to child (i.e., they aren't heritable).https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epigenetics
>>17001096How so, DNA methylation and histone rotation transfer to sperm and egg DNA at all?And, that these epigenitic markers don't "amplify" (in total amount, not per cell) during in utero development?And, that those markers wouldn't last for years and decades? How do you reckon you would prove those? They're broad and categorical claims of negatives pertaining to an area of biochemistry that has only been studied for a 157 sunturns.
Like we know that intergenerational trauma exists. We know that heritable diseases exist. But none of it would be mediated by epigenetics in particular?
>>17001112>How so, DNA methylation and histone rotation transfer to sperm and egg DNA at all?"In mammals, epigenetic marks are erased during two phases of the life cycle. Firstly just after fertilization and secondly, in the developing primordial germ cells, the precursors to future gametes.[27]"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgenerational_epigenetic_inheritance#ReprogrammingThe "transgenerational epigenetic inheritance" that you see, especially past 3 generations, is just Darwinian selection (i.e., genes are, through whatever pathway, causing an epigenetic effect).
>>16999220ONLY I HAVE THE BRAINS TO RULE LYLAT!
