When the enemy has overwhelming strength on the frontline, the correct strategic option is a flanking maneuver. In this war, that would mean redirecting the focus to a concentration on the genetics of D-Factor scores across a heterogeneous sample. Delving into group means would be avoided until a strong data base is established.
Another excellent article. Psychometrics is a critical aspect of genetics. With it, the enhancement of positive human traits would be significantly improved. This is most likely the reason for the imposition of data availability. If Trump is serious about MAGA, he will put an end to this anti-science nonsense.
Psychometrics is to genetics what social psychology is to neurobiology. Stop trying to launder your surveys, verbal questionnaire scores, and leading-question correlations by bundling them with sciences that use detailed quantitative analysis and trace causation with identifiable mechanisms.
"Psychometrics is to genetics what social psychology is to neurobiology."
My point was that psychometrics is a valuable tool for determining the genetic effect on human traits. Perhaps I should have stated it differently, such as: 'Psychometrics is a critical aspect of human genetic enhancement.'. How would you determine the genetic effect on human traits?
I was a cab driver in Sacramento for many years. I learned interpersonal skills and cold reading, and I never got robbed once. I know how to evaluate logical fallacies in writing. I learned to read critically long before I graduated from university. The activated behaviors observed in the close orders of my experience is what counts the most for me.
I care how people act; that isn't something to be found on a tout sheet. The "genetic effect on human traits" does not loom large as a priority for me. But if someone is bent on attempting to draw those linkages, the first thing they need to do is admit that it's a very ambitious task, fraught with complications that have nothing to do with politics. https://theinfinitesimal.substack.com/p/posts-by-topic
The task of sorting out gene heredity form epigenetic influences on gene expression has hardly even begun, for example. That's upstream from factors like human nurturing influence, and developmental windows.
Hypothetically, the only way to really get a reasonably precise reading on the way genes influence subtle trait complexes like intelligence is to engage in the arduous work of mapping gene interactions to trace direct causative pathways to behavioral expressions. Beginning with a cognitive measure most amenable to sure measurement- like short-term memory, say. Repeating a number sequence or word list accurately from memory shortly after reading it is what I would call a reliable psychometrics test. (It's only one component of intelligence; my short-term memory is not great, but I test well despite that impediment. My impression is that I'm intelligent in some respects, and bafflingly obtuse in others. Authentic polymaths are very, very rare. And even then, not perfected beings; I've read of a few who are pompous asses or otherwise difficult folks to be around. And for some ironic reason, nothing makes otherwise intelligent people less intelligent than the embrace of a single Ideological frame. Although partisan politics is worse, with its requirement for both a sacrifice of intelligence and an even greater sacrifice of principles and integrity. Half-mindedness.)
Other psychometrics are shoddier. For example, correlations of measured IQ score with occupational success--and even formal educational advancement--are murky, and subject to multiple confounding factors. Does anyone think that the people with highest intelligence in the Soviet Union are those who rose to the most prominence in their fields, or as leaders of their polities? Many of them were refuseniks. Many went to the gulag. Misfits and rebels are not unique to Marxist-Leninist socialist regimes. Similar control and culling mechanisms are found in all sorts of societies. The power exercised by those humans of highest social status in a complex society tends to be vain and control obsessed, demanding conformity and rewarding fealty--a concept that factors into enforced racism as well as enforced egalitarianism.
Your verbose reply mostly has nothing to do with my comment. If you don't believe in embryo selection or gene enhancement, just say so. It is an excellent tool for humanity's ascent. Determining which genes are instrumental in forming human traits is a complex process. Still, research with algorithms designed to compile, sort, and analyze extremely large and complex data sets can be done.
“A scientist is a scientist is a scientist.”
Unless he’s an HBD “scientist”, then he is a national threat. :-(
NIH's policy seems a pretty clear 1st amendment violation (they are trying to control speech).
If somebody wants to take them to court. I don't think it would be long or difficult.
When the enemy has overwhelming strength on the frontline, the correct strategic option is a flanking maneuver. In this war, that would mean redirecting the focus to a concentration on the genetics of D-Factor scores across a heterogeneous sample. Delving into group means would be avoided until a strong data base is established.
Paging Alexandra Elbakyan...
Another excellent article. Psychometrics is a critical aspect of genetics. With it, the enhancement of positive human traits would be significantly improved. This is most likely the reason for the imposition of data availability. If Trump is serious about MAGA, he will put an end to this anti-science nonsense.
Psychometrics is to genetics what social psychology is to neurobiology. Stop trying to launder your surveys, verbal questionnaire scores, and leading-question correlations by bundling them with sciences that use detailed quantitative analysis and trace causation with identifiable mechanisms.
"Psychometrics is to genetics what social psychology is to neurobiology."
My point was that psychometrics is a valuable tool for determining the genetic effect on human traits. Perhaps I should have stated it differently, such as: 'Psychometrics is a critical aspect of human genetic enhancement.'. How would you determine the genetic effect on human traits?
I was a cab driver in Sacramento for many years. I learned interpersonal skills and cold reading, and I never got robbed once. I know how to evaluate logical fallacies in writing. I learned to read critically long before I graduated from university. The activated behaviors observed in the close orders of my experience is what counts the most for me.
I care how people act; that isn't something to be found on a tout sheet. The "genetic effect on human traits" does not loom large as a priority for me. But if someone is bent on attempting to draw those linkages, the first thing they need to do is admit that it's a very ambitious task, fraught with complications that have nothing to do with politics. https://theinfinitesimal.substack.com/p/posts-by-topic
The task of sorting out gene heredity form epigenetic influences on gene expression has hardly even begun, for example. That's upstream from factors like human nurturing influence, and developmental windows.
Hypothetically, the only way to really get a reasonably precise reading on the way genes influence subtle trait complexes like intelligence is to engage in the arduous work of mapping gene interactions to trace direct causative pathways to behavioral expressions. Beginning with a cognitive measure most amenable to sure measurement- like short-term memory, say. Repeating a number sequence or word list accurately from memory shortly after reading it is what I would call a reliable psychometrics test. (It's only one component of intelligence; my short-term memory is not great, but I test well despite that impediment. My impression is that I'm intelligent in some respects, and bafflingly obtuse in others. Authentic polymaths are very, very rare. And even then, not perfected beings; I've read of a few who are pompous asses or otherwise difficult folks to be around. And for some ironic reason, nothing makes otherwise intelligent people less intelligent than the embrace of a single Ideological frame. Although partisan politics is worse, with its requirement for both a sacrifice of intelligence and an even greater sacrifice of principles and integrity. Half-mindedness.)
Other psychometrics are shoddier. For example, correlations of measured IQ score with occupational success--and even formal educational advancement--are murky, and subject to multiple confounding factors. Does anyone think that the people with highest intelligence in the Soviet Union are those who rose to the most prominence in their fields, or as leaders of their polities? Many of them were refuseniks. Many went to the gulag. Misfits and rebels are not unique to Marxist-Leninist socialist regimes. Similar control and culling mechanisms are found in all sorts of societies. The power exercised by those humans of highest social status in a complex society tends to be vain and control obsessed, demanding conformity and rewarding fealty--a concept that factors into enforced racism as well as enforced egalitarianism.
Your verbose reply mostly has nothing to do with my comment. If you don't believe in embryo selection or gene enhancement, just say so. It is an excellent tool for humanity's ascent. Determining which genes are instrumental in forming human traits is a complex process. Still, research with algorithms designed to compile, sort, and analyze extremely large and complex data sets can be done.