waveman comments on Open thread, Oct. 03 - Oct. 09, 2016 - Less Wrong

4 Post author: MrMind 03 October 2016 06:59AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (175)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Lumifer 07 October 2016 08:57:31PM 2 points [-]

But wealth, along with a solid education, a well-developed relevant skill in the marketplace, a well-established social and professional network, and a family with a good reputation can be much more persistent.

The claim is that most of that is biology and heritable. Your ancestors had good genes (again, IQ but not only) which allowed them to gain a skill in the marketplace, construct a social network, create a family with good reputation, and acquire wealth. You have skills in the marketplace, able to adroitly navigate society, etc. primarily because you share genes with your ancestors, not because you inherited some money.

my parents ... taught me

This is the nature vs nurture debate and lately the nature side has been winning. Who and what you are is considerably more determined by your genes rather than by your upbringing. Gwern posted about this here, on LW, or you can google up twin studies (studies of (genetically) identical twins who were separated at birth and brought up by different people in different circumstances).

Can you give me some examples of how "culture persists across generations"?

See e.g. Yvain's review of Albion's Seed.

Comment author: Brillyant 07 October 2016 09:31:43PM -1 points [-]

I accept genes are a big part of the picture.

I'm not sure I believe genetics are more important than other factors. And this is not necessarily a simple nature vs. nurture issue. In the case of African Americans' treatment in U.S. history, it's an extreme set of "nurture" circumstances that robbed a group of people of all opportunity for many generations, based on race. I'm not sure "good genes" simply overcomes extremely lopsided (often systemically unfair) circumstances.

Anyway, it won't be resolved here. Thanks for your thoughts.

Comment author: waveman 07 October 2016 09:54:37PM 2 points [-]

I'm not sure I believe genetics are more important than other factors.

I suggest you examine the evidence offered above and consider reducing your confidence in your beliefs.

Comment author: Brillyant 08 October 2016 12:51:56AM -1 points [-]

I should clarify. I accept genes are a big part of the picture. I'm more of a nature guy in the debate between nature and nurture.

In the specific case of African Americans' treatment in U.S. history and their current status, I'm not convinced genetics are more important than other factors. Because this specific case is more than just a simple nature vs. nurture issue—it is a very special case where an extreme deficit was created using slavery. And then segregation. And racism and discrimination all throughout up to the present day.

What evidence you cite above is compelling to you? What do you believed based on this evidence?