= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
PhilGoetz comments on More thoughts on assertions - 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 (31)
His opinion carries even more weight than that, because we assume that lesser experts (and experts with less reputation for being, shall we say, free with their opinions) are more likely to keep controversial opinions to themselves.
A plausible bias theory is that Watson and Crick tended to apply their Big Idea promiscuously and err in the direction of attributing too much to genetics, with which their status is intertwined. Note that knowledge of molecular genetics doesn't tell you about past selective pressures on human populations, or about the psychology/behavioral genetics work on current human ability distributions.
Another plausible bias theory might be that they are simply old and extremely high status and that high status old people rarely make major updates to their beliefs in the absence of compelling evidence even if they are very intelligent. It could be that there was a consensus in favor of genetic differences in intelligence when they were young, and that there is now stronger but not overwhelming evidence against that old consensus, plus strong social pressure. Who's likely to not move in response to that evidence plus social pressure?
Yet another bias theory is that Watson just likes to be outrageous and see what he can get away with. I've read "The Double Helix" and it encourages that interpretation..