= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Eliezer_Yudkowsky comments on She Blinded Me With Science - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (38)
Because there is no such number. More variance in the environment will mean "less heritability".
Fix: "...under the strongest environmental interventions known today".
Have fun trying to define what is accepted as an "environmental intervention" and what isn't.
(Getting your head smashed in with a hammer will end up reducing your body weight rather quickly, so going by your suggestion obesity is 0% heritable.)
How about "malleability"? Obesity is malleable either way (overeating, liposuction). IQ is highly malleable downwards (hammer to head), not so much upwards (a year of schooling gives +2 points). Eye color, 0% malleable. Maybe take a derivative in effort/time/money to change a trait in the desired direction.
This will be both more useful socially and vastly easier to estimate than "heritability", if we accept Shalizi's proof that "heritability" is almost impossible to measure. By the way, the original post relies upon that proof.