My god you're being difficult.
I'm known for it. I also know that when I am being difficult, and I just capitulate, that is when things go to disaster, which is what why I am being so difficult. It's an extremely successful survival mechanism. It has been tested beyond destruction, and has almost zero failure rate.
As I've stated before, these same results are replicated across many studies, countries and age groups which use varying data sets and methodologies.
If the data so obviously proves you right, why not prove yourself right, by giving me a copy of the data, so I can see that you are right for myself?
Some groups are just generally brighter than others. Whether in Asia or the United States, for instance, East Asians tend to score higher than whites on g-loaded nonverbal tests. That's a fact.
Yes, I know. East Asians average 3 IQ points higher than whites, and I am from the group that is 15 IQ points higher than whites, and higher than just about everyone else on the planet. So according to you, if I am the guy who understands this stuff better than you, and the East Asians, and nearly everyone else here. So your own data is screaming at you, that if I do not understand, it means there is a big problem, and you are only not seeing it, because you aren't of that calibre.
I've been talking about how SES affects IQ, and the reverse, this whole fucking time.
Yes, and so far, your ideas seem to be largely predicated on the assumptions that some groups are just
genetically smarter than others, and it's making the whole description of environmental factors to be totally confusing to me, and I don't really understand what you are saying.
Another problem is your use of terms. I know what maths is. I know what English is. I know what English comprehension is. I know what algebra is. I know a multitude of types of questions that comes on tests, and a multitude of levels for each type of question. But so far, your terminology is incredibly confusing to me.
For instance, you refer to non-g-loaded, as opposed to g-loaded tests. I wasn't really pushing you there, because you talked about them as if they were obvious. I should have, because I basically didn't understand what tests you were talking about. However, your post irritated me so much, that I looked a couple of them up, namely the forward digit span test, and the matrix reasoning test. From what I have looked up, the forward digit span test, is basically listing off a set of numbers, and seeing how well you can recall the sequence. The matrix reasoning test, appears to be laying out a series of symbolic pictures in a sequence, with the next one missing, and with multiple choice as to what comes next, and seeing how many you correctly select as the next one in the sequence.
I happen to do extremely well on both tests. However, unlike most people, I don't really learn by imitation very well. So I learned to be good at those tests, by consciously figuring out what was asked of me, and what cognitive skills would be required of me, and how to carry them out. In the process, I discovered that they require certain assumptions and algorithms. I thus know that I can teach anyone to be good at those tests, simply by explaining the algorithm, and then making the person practise those skills again and again. They are
learned skills.
It is blatantly apparent to me, that the same methods that would build up those skills, are also methods that occur often in many people's lives, depending on their environment. In certain households, those practice exercises are part and parcel of how those families function.
The forward digit span test, is a basic sort of test, whose skills require frequent practice, by building up from small sequences of 1 or 2, building up to 10, 20, even 100. Depending on the way the family function, those tests are generally either be a natural part of the way those families would raise kids from birth upwards, or they are simply not trained.
The matrix reasoning skills, are a matter of learning the point of the test, the basic methodology, and training on a regular basis. These skills are not normally found in daily life, but are a part and parcel of the Western education system. How much people are trained, is dependent on the type of school and teachers you happen to have. In addition, in many families, those types of tests are set as interesting puzzles, because the parents know full well that those types of tests and reasoning skills are a basic requirement for gaining high results in Western qualification systems, and for gaining entry to higher levels of classes, and for gaining entry to higher education, and those parents are deliberately training their kids to do better in exams and in schools as a result.
In short, both of those skills, while possibly latently inherent in many individuals, are also highly influenced by environmental factors. As it happens, matrix reasoning skills are consistently trained in proportion to values such as one's SES, and particularly increase, in ethnic groups where such skills are assumed to be required learning skills. The forward digit span tests, are not considered important for higher education, but are used much more by people on the lower end of SES, and so are more consistently found, and thus trained for, in homes with a low SES.
My own experiences, and my experiences observing them with others, are that such training results in a huge leap forwards in ability. So far, the only limitation that I have found, is simply lack of interest in the pupil, which is mostly due to lack of belief that they will be helpful to one, based on one's own experiences, which is correlated with the corresponding SES levels for those tests, and the level of discipline that one can enforce on the pupil to make him develop those tests, even when he lacks interest, and discipline for those types of tests, which again correlated with the corresponding SES levels for those tests.
From what I know, and what I have experienced, I could completely reverse your results, simply by changing the home and school environments, and I also know that your test results are correlated to a very high degree with the corresponding SES levels in the home environment, that your own test results correlate to.
If you list out more tests, and describe them accurately, and you tell me the results, I am fairly sure that I can make similar observations.
So far, your own results, bear out that environmental factors would be a massive effect on these tests, so much so, that genetics would not even be worth looking at.
. I wish I knew which side you were on
