intelligence genes discovered

[SearchingforPeace]

Intelligence-genes-discovered-by-scientists

Genes which make people intelligent have been discovered and scientists believe they could be manipulated to boost brain power.

Researchers have believed for some time that intellect inherited with studies suggesting that up to 75 per cent of IQ is genetic, and the rest down to environmental factors such as schooling and friendship groups.

But until now, nobody has been able to pin-point exactly which genes are responsible for better memory, attention, processing speed or reasoning skills.

“Our research suggests that it might be possible to work with these genes to modify intelligence"

Dr Michael Johnson, Imperial College London

Now Imperial College London has found that two networks of genes determine whether people are intelligent or not-so-bright.

They liken the gene network to a football team. When all the players are in the right positions, the brain appears to function optimally, leading to clarity of thought and what we think of as quickness or cleverness.

However when the genes are mutated or in the wrong order, it can lead to dullness of thinking, or even serious cognitive impairments.
.....
Earlier this year a team at King’s College London discovered that up to 65 per cent of the difference in pupil’s GCSE grades was down to genetics, after analysing genetic data fro, 12,500 twins.

They found that all exam results were highly heritable, demonstrating that genes explain a larger proportion of the differences between children, between 54 and 65 per cent.

It makes entire sense. There is very real human diversity. Factors such as supportive parents, culture, etc do play a role, but mostly it is genes. Of course, the Bell Curve authors got destroyed for suggesting such 21 years ago.

The article discusses a search for a master switch to turn on genes and functions.....

 

[Poki]

I need more info on GCSE grades. I know a lot of intelligent people who get bad grades in school. Me included, I graduated in the bottom quarter of my class. I slept through classes. I also know a lot of not so intelligent students who get good grades due to pure effort. I need more info before I deem their judgement of "intelligence" as correct.

 

[Lark]

I'm reading more and more things like this at the moment but simultaneously I'm reading about chaos candidates in the elections in the most important political centres of the world, I'm reading about the ramping up of tensions which are cold war tensions in all but name, the discovery of totally antibiotic resistant disease in centres such as the UK.

I cant help but believe that the positive discoveries may all prove to be too little too late for humanity, there remain very strong social darwinian and malthusian thinking among elites and the masses who are still more likely to identify with them than their own objective interests.

 

[/DG/]

I need more info on GCSE grades. I know a lot of intelligent people who get bad grades in school. Me included, I graduated in the bottom quarter of my class. I slept through classes. I also know a lot of not so intelligent students who get good grades due to pure effort. I need more info before I deem their judgement of "intelligence" as correct.

I do completely understand what you are saying...but how do you personally define their intelligence then? Surely you do not know the IQ or Wechsler intelligence scale score of these people.

 

[Lark]

I need more info on GCSE grades. I know a lot of intelligent people who get bad grades in school. Me included, I graduated in the bottom quarter of my class. I slept through classes. I also know a lot of not so intelligent students who get good grades due to pure effort. I need more info before I deem their judgement of "intelligence" as correct.

I tried very hard at school and I worked very hard academically since, I have two seperate degrees, both of which were close to being first class, I have a masters which is first class.

Yet, I cant help but believe that most of my achievement has been largely a product of autodidact learning, my own reading, its all booksmarts, which anyone can have and I did it all largely on the basis of a grudge I developed growing up in low, low expectation environments, surrounded by people who didnt want to learn, who were anti-intellectual, anti-intelligent, sometimes violent with it and teachers who were resigned largely to classes and classes of "wasters" with no aspirations.

Since that time all I've known have been lots of people who've had a much easier experience of rising in the world, can do families, communities, with the sort of "why couldnt/wouldnt you" entitlement convictions of more privileged people.

Some of them are not as bright as their credentials, professions etc. would have anyone believe, they are incredibly precious about the respect they think they deserve and feel no one is giving them, with that they have a great deal of power to shape reality by framing and reframing narratives about others, particularly subordinates. They really arent great people, they definitely are not nice people, little matters to them besides success, as they understand it, and they're usually big fans of a lot of really shallow business seminar style thinking which says its all that matters in any case.

Its all a big vindication of the Dunning-Kruger effect research I only discovered myself later in life.

And it all makes me think that the quiet, unassuming, under achievers, who earn enough to live a good life by their own lights, the people who're virtually invisible but married, kids, maybe doing menial or maintenance but earning an honest living, staying clear of vice like drugs etc. not sharing neighbourhoods with anyone else who does are the totally and utter fucking geniuses.

It really doesnt matter how smart you are if you arent happy and as time goes on I'm convinced that the smarter you are the less liable you are to be happy about anything.

 

[Poki]

I do completely understand what you are saying...but how do you personally define their intelligence then? Surely you do not know the IQ or Wechsler intelligence scale score of these people.

In order to claim "I found the intelligence gene" you would have to find a way to determine intelligence. The simple solution is to change the title more to something more accurate. Like Lark had said and from I have witnessed the best grades in school are usually the ones who tried and learned. The intelligent ones are off the charts and the less intelligent ones score mid to upper grades. The opposite end of the scale is people like me who sleep through class, don't really try, calculate how much I need to do to just pass school because it bored the hell outta me. I aced tests and got zeros on homework.

Put me in the real world where sky is the limits on what I learn and what I can do and I fly. My IQ generally tests in the 150-160 range from online tests, paid software tests, etc. I enjoy mensa challenges every once in awhile. I actually make it a challenge to see how fast and how high a score I can get. It dips down if I drop a 45-60 minute IQ test to under 10 minutes. 15 min though and I can usually hit 150-155 every time. 160-165...165 is the highest I scored so I consider that an outlier and my range to be more about 160 is when I take the entire time.

My uncle challenged me to an IQ test when I was 13-14 because he scored around 130. So I took the adult version that he took and I scored 145. I don't do very good in school though because I don't really care. I am self taught in most things I know, everything else my parents taught me. Books, forums, hands on, etc. Everything else goes to slow and I either sleep or my mind goes to other things. I doodled a lot in school, I listened while I was distracted doodling.

With this being said I think intelligence is just a small portion of a person ability to be smart or successful. I don't think intelligence is the key, its just a single component. I think this is a very important find, kinda worried about messing with DNA. But I think this is a small key to a bigger puzzle irregardless of my disagreement on questioning the determination of "intelligence". This seems to be more of a drive thing, then intelligence.

 

[/DG/]

In order to claim "I found the intelligence gene" you would have to find a way to determine intelligence. The simple solution is to change the title more to something more accurate.

If you'd read a bit more into the article, you'd notice that the one looking at the grades was only one of the studies mentioned. Another used IQ tests, which are probably a more accurate way of determining things.

Secondly, the article doesn't really seem to imply that there is one be all end all gene of intelligence. For some reason, a few sentences of it do seem to state that, but other studies mentioned in the article don't really indicate this. Intelligence is a pleiotropic trait--it is influenced by many factors, just as we don't have a singular gene for height.

Like Lark had said and from I have witnessed the best grades in school are usually the ones who tried and learned. The intelligent ones are off the charts and the less intelligent ones score mid to upper grades. The opposite end of the scale is people like me who sleep through class, don't really try, calculate how much I need to do to just pass school because it bored the hell outta me. I aced tests and got zeros on homework.

That's fine, but that wasn't my question. You're just restating what you said earlier. I'm just wondering how you personally "measure" intelligence (assuming you don't know someone's IQ). It's not an accusation or anything. I'm just curious.

Put me in the real world where sky is the limits on what I learn and what I can do and I fly. My IQ generally tests in the 150-160 range from online tests, paid software tests, etc...

You do realize that these online tests, be they free or not, are not really very accurate, right? They are all artificially inflated. I've taken them myself. If you've been officially tested and have a high IQ, then that's fine. It still doesn't make the online tests valid.

With this being said I think intelligence is just a small portion of a person ability to be smart or successful. I don't think intelligence is the key, its just a single component. I think this is a very important find, kinda worried about messing with DNA. But I think this is a small key to a bigger puzzle irregardless of my disagreement on questioning the determination of "intelligence". This seems to be more of a drive thing, then intelligence.

I do agree with this.

 

[Betty Blue]

Well there are multiple intelligences, I presume this means the type of academic IQ test intelligence?

 

[Poki]

If you'd read a bit more into the article, you'd notice that the one looking at the grades was only one of the studies mentioned. Another used IQ tests, which are probably a more accurate way of determining things.

Secondly, the article doesn't really seem to imply that there is one be all end all gene of intelligence. For some reason, a few sentences of it do seem to state that, but other studies mentioned in the article don't really indicate this. Intelligence is a pleiotropic trait--it is influenced by many factors, just as we don't have a singular gene for height.



That's fine, but that wasn't my question. You're just restating what you said earlier. I'm just wondering how you personally "measure" intelligence (assuming you don't know someone's IQ).



You do realize that these online tests, be they free or not, are not really very accurate, right? They are all artificially inflated. I've taken them myself. If you've been officially tested and have a high IQ, then that's fine. It still doesn't make the online tests valid.



I do agree with this.

I had skimmed that IQ paragraph as it seemed like external supporting evidence while the GCSE was more directly related as the article started off with London College and the comments about GCSE were London college as well. I did pick up that it wasn't one gene as its multiple genes and also based on the order of genes. It was just simpler to say "gene".

I usually pick it up by how quick someone can understand complex things. Less intelligence usually takes longer on average to understand complex things, more intelligent can pick things up faster. Smart is based on what someone knows and can be through either intelligence or through dedication.

Yes I have taken actual paid tests for intelligence and I scored highly gifted in all but 2 sections tested. I scored one step below highly gifted in those 2 sections. Those tests are to expensive to take as often as computer based ones.

 

[Poki]

Well there are multiple intelligences, I presume this means the type of academic IQ test intelligence?

Inteligence is the ability to learn and understand. It does not go into what the topic is. The faster and more you can understand complex topics the more intelligent you are.

From Webster - the ability to learn or understand or to deal with new or trying situations : reason; also : the skilled use of reason (2) : the ability to apply knowledge to manipulate one's environment or to think abstractly as measured by objective criteria (as tests); the act of understanding

 

[Betty Blue]

Inteligence is the ability to learn and understand. It does not go into what the topic is. The faster and more you can understand complex topics the more intelligent you are.

From Webster - the ability to learn or understand or to deal with new or trying situations : reason; also : the skilled use of reason (2) : the ability to apply knowledge to manipulate one's environment or to think abstractly as measured by objective criteria (as tests); the act of understanding

I am well aware of this. I do think though that they may be talking of 'tested' or measurable by IQ test intelligence.

The notion that non westerners are savages could be (mistakenly) proven through IQ testing. However, I am certain there are highly intelligent people living in situations where they have no means of changing things... or no desire.

There are many intelligences, social intelligence works very well for ladder climbers and those in people facing jobs. There is also musical and sport intelligence, intelligences to do with the mechanisms of things... -I imagine you are very good with that. There are practical intelligences... the types that would survive an apocalypse.

I doubt any of these will be included... though it would be nice if some are...

For myself I adapt well in most areas- provided I have enough interest in them. aka - Jack of all trades, master of none. I am not particularly well suited to academic surroundings though I do fair well with linguistic intelligence.

 

[Poki]

I am well aware of this. I do think though that they may be talking of 'tested' or measurable by IQ test intelligence.

The notion that non westerners are savages could be (mistakenly) proven through IQ testing. However, I am certain there are highly intelligent people living in situations where they have no means of changing things... or no desire.

There are many intelligences, social intelligence works very well for ladder climbers and those in people facing jobs. There is also musical and sport intelligence, intelligences to do with the mechanisms of things... -I imagine you are very good with that. There are practical intelligences... the types that would survive an apocalypse.

I doubt any of these will be included... though it would be nice if some are...

For myself I adapt well in most areas- provided I have enough interest in them. aka - Jack of all trades, master of none. I am not particularly well suited to academic surroundings though I do fair well with linguistic intelligence.

My intelligence revolves around conceptual intelligence.



Something I found online that explains what I mean by it. I don't like the "most advanced" sentence. I don't like to think of other things as not as important. Its just my specialty.

Conceptual intelligence is the understanding of concepts. Conceptual intelligence is the most advanced and important type of intelligence that we can have. Examples of conceptual intelligence are algebra, economics, human interactions and relations, philosophy, and morality. The difference between conceptual intelligence and let's say a memory is that a memory is simply a fact or an event or a trivia that is memorized. However, a conceptual intelligence is the thorough understanding of a concept. One of the best examples is from the movie "Rainman". Raymond, the autistic character had the ability to memorize facts and statistics better than most people, however, Raymond could not understand many concepts such as human interactions as evidenced by his inability to empathize with others. Raymond knew the history of all airplane crashes BUT did not understand the concept of probabilities, evidenced by his extreme fear of flying. Raymond knew all the stats regarding the car's engine, but did not understand how an engine works. It is said that "knowledge is power". But it would be more correct to say that "Conceptual Intelligence together with knowledge is power". What good is knowledge if you do not know how to apply it? And that is the role of Conceptual intelligence... the understanding that allows for the application of knowledge.

The fact that its based on order of genes is the most interesting part to me. I would like a more detailed analysis of how order affects people in different ways. Concrete examples and such.

 

[Betty Blue]

My intelligence revolves around conceptual intelligence.



Something I found online that explains what I mean by it. I don't like the "most advanced" sentence. I don't like to think of other things as not as important. Its just my specialty.


The fact that its based on order of genes is the most interesting part to me. I would like a more detailed analysis of how order affects people in different ways. Concrete examples and such.

Personally I'd not be surprised if most intelligences are passed genetically by and large. I do believe it is why you can have families with trades/careers being passed down through the lines over many generations. Some skillsets are better suited to particular types of things. Yeah i'd also like to know what the research is based on..

 

[Betty Blue]

Ok, so reading through the linked article it does mention several areas but then focusses on g.c.s.e results, suggesting they are primarily concerned with academic intelligence.

 

[Poki]

Ok, so reading through the linked article it does mention several areas but then focusses on g.c.s.e results, suggesting they are primarily concerned with academic intelligence.

academic/school grades is not a reliable method to detect intelligence which is my issue with that portion of it. Its more testing academic smarts. Time under tension can make up for lack of intelligence. Someone less intelligent can spend more time studying and be just as smart as someone more intelligent.

 

[Cellmold]

And it all makes me think that the quiet, unassuming, under achievers, who earn enough to live a good life by their own lights, the people who're virtually invisible but married, kids, maybe doing menial or maintenance but earning an honest living, staying clear of vice like drugs etc. not sharing neighbourhoods with anyone else who does are the totally and utter fucking geniuses.

Thanks.