Quote:
|
Originally Posted by sapiens
Marginal difference in IQ among human beings? Are you familiar at all with research on IQ? If you think that there is only a marginal difference in IQ among human beings, you are completely divorced from reality and completely unfamiliar with research on intelligence. Even those who would argue that intelligence has little to do with a particular outcome I have cited would not argue that there is only a marginal difference in IQ among human beings.
|
There is a marginal diference in IQ among human beings relative to the difference in wealth. Simply because you disagree with that statement does not change the fact that the wealthiest are hundreds of thousands of times more wealthy than the poorest and it does not change that fact that the most intelligent are not hundreds of thousands of times more intelligent than the least intelligent.
Quote:
|
The original discussion had little to do with large wealth.
|
That you failed to grasp the original discussion does not alter the original discussion.
Quote:
|
Still, I the sources I have cited address it. The NLSY used by Herrnstein and Murray is a stratified representative sample of individuals in the US- meaning it includes both the very rich and the very poor. The sources I cite below also address the wealthy.
|
I'm sure Hernstein and Murray do address the wealthy - but your description thus far of their research does not address the topic. The topic is what is the primary determining factor in the future probability of an individual achieving large wealth. As you have described
The Bell Curve, it does not address that topic. Rather, as you say, it addresses the topic of whether IQ affects an increase in future wealth relative to current wealth - in other words, IQ influencing progression, not IQ influencing result.
Quote:
|
Education and intelligence each contribute to a worker's income, but the smart individuals earn most of the extra wage benefit of education.
|
And once again, as long as you are aruging this, you are not aruging anything with me. Because that statement is NOT relevent to the topic - no matter how much you want it to be.
Quote:
Blackburn, M.L., and Neumark, D. (1991). Unobserved Ability, Efficiency Wages, and Interindustry Wage Differentials. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
Angrist, J.D. and Krueger, A.B. (1991). Does compulsory school attendance affect schooling and earnings? Quarterly Journal of Economics, 106, 979-1014.
The relationship of IQ and Income
Burt, C.L., 1943. Ability and income. British Journal of Educational Psychology 13, pp. 83–98.
Gottfredson, L.S., 1986. The g factor in employment. Journal of Vocational Behavior 29, pp. 293–450 Special Issue.
Herrnstein, H.J. and Murray, C., 1994. The bell curve: intelligence and class structure in American life, The Free Press, New York.
Jencks, C., 1979. Who gets ahead? The determinants of economic success in America, Basic Books, New York.
Jensen, A.R., 1998. The g factor, Praeger, Westport, CT.
Mackintosh, N.J., 1998. IQ and human intelligence, Oxford University Press, New York.
Nyborg, H & Jensen, AR (2001). Occupation and income related to psychometric g. Intelligence, Vol 29(1), 45-55.
|
I searched a bit on some of these reports. Most are readily unavailable though some are summarized. Of the summaries or seemingly similar articles, I did not see much of anything which directly applies to the discussion. Based on the titles of some of them, they seem to be entirely generic - IQ and human intelligence - if I post a source to something called "Socio-economic status and delineations of wealth" is that going have any specific relevance to the topic? Most likely not.
The saddest part of this discussion, other than the fact that you never actually took part in it beyond trying to change the topic, is that I didn't even get to the parts where I deny the basis of IQ measurement to begin with or how SES effects IQ more so than genetic factors in lower income environments (this aspect entirely counters even the discussion you wanted to have) or where we discuss the other results of varying SES as they effect the ability to acquire money, such as health. Though others who have picked apart your #1 source (and the only source before your most recent post),
The Bell Curve have taken the time to refute the general applicability of IQ. But since they were taking part in the discussion you wanted this to become, I'm not suprised that aspect was of high importance for them. In the case of the discussion that was taking place here, whether IQ is a quality measuring factor or not is ultimately irrelevent.
So although you attempted to change the topic (for whatever reason), the topic remains:
If you are from the upper class, you are more likely to remain in the upper class and if you are from the lower class, you are more likely to remain in the lower class - independent of respective intelligence - due to availability of opportunity.