[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 333 KB, 1920x1080, Einstein-Wallpaper.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3193466 No.3193466 [Reply] [Original]

intelligence is based more on genetics or discipline and hard work? what do you think /sci/?

>> No.3193502

hard work no question

although for the people truly passionate about it, its not work but exactly what they want to do. Read Gladwell's Outliers

>> No.3193534

It's a mixture of both. Hard work more so than others. And environment.

If you raise a child in an environment where they are treated like dumb shits with no potential, that's more than likely what they'll become.

>> No.3193553

You will be able to change it within the next 10-20 years. Once we get down the biological processes which control brain structure, a multitude of novel drugs would follow.

>> No.3193564

People will be born with a certain talents and greater affinity towards things others may not have, but if that child is brought up with no musical input he will not grow up to be a musician, and if a child may have a great affinity toward 'logical thought' but is brought up in a fundamentalist Christian family watching X factor all day then he probably won't develop in that direction or it would be suppressed due to nurture over nature which I believe is the driving force in the end

>> No.3193716

Ability to perform hard work, however, is genetic.

>> No.3193722

IQ can change. Knowing that i think it's VERY related to hard work. Every child learns differently, thats why public schools will be online based in the future. So you can tailor your child's learning style. Although i do think there are "gifted" children out there, it think its more of a product of a brain disorder than anything else. Tesla was very gifted, but he had a number of problems.

>> No.3193726

Classic Nature Vs. Nurture.

there is no perfect answer as of now

But i'll >>3193466 keep you posted

>> No.3194716

bump

>> No.3194761

Intelligence is genetic, if you aren't born with that ability to learn and understand things more quickly than others that constitutes intelligence, then you're SOL.
But success is definitely dependent upon hard work. Take my sister and I; it's the general consensus that I'm more intelligent than she is. But I have a shitty work ethic and hers, because she had to work harder to get things that came to me easily, is phenomenal. And because I've developed a rather lax attitude, she has better grades, got into better colleges, and will likely have a better life than I will.

>> No.3194771

>>3194761
>sibling outsmarts you and accomplishes more academically
>cling to delusion of "superior intelligence"

>> No.3194790

>>3194771
My thoughts on his post exactly.

>> No.3194851

No, it's due to both nature and nurture, this shit always is.

>> No.3194885

How do you quantify what it is based "more" on? If you look at the differences in IQ between people of the same genes and different environments or people of the same environment and different genes you are still left with the problem of quantifying differences in genes and differences in environment.

They can be quantified by economic expense and/or they can be quantified by standard deviations in a population (a population which can itself get wealthier or experience genetic degradation over time), but you can't compare nature and nurture to each other alone.

>> No.3194896
File: 30 KB, 375x500, google.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3194896

>>3193466
There are some fairly large longitudinal research studies on twins that have an interesting bearing on the subject.

In these studies they examined twins who were the offspring of high-iq parents, who had to adopt one child away. They focused on children that had been adopted to families where the new parents had lower iq compared to the original parents.

The child in the high-iq household quickly gained higher scores than those of the adopee. An effect that lasted throughout the childrens early years and puberty. The only possible explanation for this is that the high-iq homes systemically differed from the low-iq homes. (Most likely this is an issue of stimulation and support). Suggesting that there is a fairly strong effect of nurture and training.

However and rather surprisingly it turned out that the children that had been adopted eventually (somewhere in their late twenties to thirties) reached the same level of iq as the child that had stayed in their original family. It just took a few more years for the adopted one to catch up. Eventually both children reached levels significantly higher than average. Also the final iq-scores of the children correlated strongly with that of the parents.

There is really no other possible explanation for this other than iq being an expression of genetics. Sure nurture does have effects, especially on how the person learns to utilize and express their intelligence, but in the end the basic quality is based in nature.

End of story. Lets never have another iq-nature vs. nurture discussion on /sci/ again. Ever.

>> No.3194931

>>3194761
I think it's just a general consensus that you have a superiority complex.

>> No.3195131

>>3194931
>>3194931
not op but i think it seems you (and a few others) have a minority complex and are projecting the superiority complex on to him as a means of hiding your fear of not being smart enough.

>> No.3195270

Hard Work is the only path to success

>> No.3195308

i am pretty intelligent,but i do not work at all.
will any of you ever hear of me? no.
do i want to contribute science? no.intelligence = / = success that's kindergarten level logic. i saw many idiots outperform me because of their working habits.

>> No.3195324

Hard work, my parents didn't even finish high school, I'm majoring in chemical engineering 2nd year!!

>> No.3195443

hard work no doubt

>> No.3195572

bump

>> No.3195610

lots of people are confusing the figurative term "success" with distinguishable, verifiable intelligence. in terms of success, hard work is the ultimate factor. on the end of "above-average intelligence" however, that is strictly an inherited capability.

i like to think of it like this: consider two empty containers. one is small and the other is large. pour water into both of them until they are full. obviously, a larger container will hold more water than the small container (among other things). no matter how hard the small one tries, it cannot hold more water than the larger one.

the containers are brains. pouring water into them constitutes acquiring knowledge. the sizes of the containers are determined by the genetics of the individual (hereditary trait). the "maxing out" of the container's liquid volume is the limitations of each particular brain.

all i'm getting at is that the predisposition of a brain ultimately determines its capabilities in the long-run. therefore, innate wit is an inherited--not learned--quality.

>> No.3195643

Its hard work, I dont give a shit about anyone of you that say you are a "genius" but only didnt try hard in school and thats why others did better than you.

It appears to me that a lot of you just had mommy drill it int your head that you are the smartest person in the world. So delusional.

However, some historical figures such as pythagoras or newton or euler were probably very smart without much work, or perhaps just more observant

>> No.3195650

genetics without a doubt, success is where hard work comes in

>> No.3195662

education. countries with better education have higher average IQs

>> No.3195693

>>3193466
I'm gonna go with hard work
just as with your physical fitness
marathon runners aren't born marathon runners - they train to become marathon runners
greats minds aren't born great - they train to become great

sure some people have a genetic advantage over others, just like with people training to be marathon runners, but everyone can be great if they put the time in and train

>> No.3195744

If it wasn't genetics, then evolution wouldn't work...

>> No.3195760

>>3195693
That's a very shit analogy. Academic performance is more hardwork than intelligence, but intelligence itself is genetic.

Marathon runners ARE born runners. Not just anyone can become a world class athlete, no matter how hard they work. Why do you think that every world record setting marathon runner is Kenyan or Ethiopian?

In the same way, smart people are born smart. How well they perform academically is mainly hard work.

>> No.3195761

Having a good education is necessary, but you have to work at it, not just drift through passively. You have to be engaged.

>> No.3195759

More nurture than nature.

>> No.3195772

>>3195761
That's knowledge, not intelligence.

>> No.3195792

An interaction between both.

>> No.3195805

>>3195772

Practically there is no distinction.

Things such as critical thinking, skepticism, problem-solving etc have to be learned.

>> No.3195806

>>3195760
Pretty much what he says.
Lets get real.
Everything is genetic.
Some might run faster, some might work even harder to catch up the faster, but eventually if they both work evenly the genetically faster will do better.

It goes about everything else.
Dont pretend that we're all equal.
Within race, families and individuals, we all have different level of innate intelligence.

Am not talking IQ, just intelligence, IQ measurement is only good for statistical data, it can give a vague approximation to the individual and thats all.

Success on academics rely on many different things you must have the personality, the goals, habits etc to be successful academic-wise.

All in all you need above average intelligence and the personality.

>> No.3195824

>>3195805
>Things such as critical thinking, skepticism, problem-solving etc have to be learned.

Not him but the things you mentioned are pretty much the same thing, skepticism is critical thinking, critical thinking is analyzing/solving, to a neuroscientist all that is one thing, intelligence.

They are innate, you just need the KNOWLEDGE to apply them.

>> No.3195841

>>3195760
So true, if only I applied myself. :( Instead I half ass everything and take B's. Why can't motivation be genetic! :(

>> No.3195885

>>3195806
>>3195760
anyone can be a good runner
everyone cannot be THE BEST runner
but everyone can still be a good runner

(and you can be as good a runner as you want to be you just need to practice, all these world class runners have been training since they were very young which will give them a bigger bonus over any other person than any genetic factor could)