Hacker News Reader

> same as my parents and theirs, which really suggests a genetic component

Does it? Could be as much a product of a privileged upbringing and generational welth reproducing themselves. Do you have an adopted sibling you grew up with, that had the same environments and opportunities, but turned out to be a moron? As a control group, you know.

I find odd how people are so quick to jump to genetics to explain a thing so complex as a human being inside a society. There's SO many forces acting on it at all times, picking genes over all the others feels like an oversimplification.

I said suggests, not proves. It can't prove anything, it's just one data point. It does seem very unlikely for a dozen people to score so well academically if genetics wasn't a factor at all, or? Why didn't other, richer people score higher than any of them? And why did they marry other intelligent people?

> privileged upbringing and generational welth reproducing themselves

I come from an ex Soviet satellite state, I don't think your assumptions of what my parents/grandparents' life was like is accurate. I had a more privileged upbringing, but that doesn't explain 2 generations away.

> (same as my parents and theirs, which really suggests a genetic component)

I am not at all put off by genetic explanations (go genes!), but it does equally suggest environment and upbringing as a common element, it's a series of poster children for it.

I concede you have a point there. My opinions are colored by my experiences.

As a personal story that I will share since it also has value as an experiment: I did not see my father between the ages of 0-3 and 7-19. That means he was not there for a large part of my developmental phase, in which I formed a lot of my viewpoints on the world (at the time, obviously).

What astounded me was that when I met him, he shared a lot of those viewpoints. A lot of my behaviour that I thought was specific to me, was not. Even small things like preference for walking etc. I will not list everything obviously but it really ingrained in me that a lot of what I considered "my identity" was not chosen in any way by me. We grew up in rather different environments/countries too.

I think most humans would rather not face the fact that their identity is scarcely chosen. But learning to accept that means you can experience a lot more, since your ego doesn't mind losing parts that aren't "really part of it" anyway. Or at least it's less scary.

I drive a pickup truck. Like my dad, grandpa and uncles. Do you think there might be a genetic compent to my choice of vehicle? Its strongly suggested as such, according to you.

I see your point, but choice of transportation vehicle is more obviously dependent on environment than intelligence.

Is it? You are supposing that people don't choose their environment.

What choice? You are supposing that such a thing exists.

I think there is a strong genetic component for owning a pickup truck. Just like for dog ownership:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-44083-9

Obviously, there is also a strong environmental factor. But lacking either, will probably result in no pickup truck.

I have blue eyes, as does my mother and my two children. Do you think it is due to our similar upbringing and socioeconomic status?

Maybe genetics plays a much larger role in intelligence than we currently think, it's just so complicated that (unlike eye color) we can't identify those genes yet.

Almost all flamingos are pink. Do you think this is "genetic" the same way human eye colors are "genetic"?

(It isn't.)

> Maybe genetics plays a much larger role in intelligence than we currently think, it's just so complicated that (unlike eye color) we can't identify those genes yet.

People telling you "genetics causes x" are committing abuses of notation if they don't include the counterfactual i.e. they are lying to you.

Everything about you is 100% caused by genetics - because otherwise you'd be a gorilla.

Everything about you is also 100% caused by the environment - because if a rock fell on your head you wouldn't have any "intelligence" after that.

For the curious, flamingos get their color from food, like salmon does.

Didn't they find some very crazy similarities in seemingly arbitrary lifestyle choices with identical twins that were separated at birth? I would rate the choice of vehicle the same way, in other words, possibly genetic.

The original topic under discussion is the impotence of being clever. It seems to me your cleverness (and that of others replying to the original comment) is demonstrating that.

LOL That’s a very clever observation! Do you feel impotent as the result?

Same here. Pickups for two generations. My wife however, big fan of sedans -- been a family trait for years.

As for our kids though, both drive Caminos.

I don't think anyone is claiming that's the only factor, but it does seem that some people have higher natural aptitudes for some modes of thought, at least to me.

Wealth and privileged upbringing do not result in intelligence. On the contrary, children brought up being able to goof around in comfy surroundings often turn out to be mediocre regardless of the standard of their education.

Is there supporting evidence for this? I'm sympathetic, mainly because I didn't grow up in a comfortable environment either

I seriously doubt, since there actually is evidence that, for adults, psychological safety is a major factor in productivity at work, specifically at knowledge work.

Yeah, and I imagine for children the same is true, atleast from a face validity p.o.v, the opposite of that claim was so off kilter from what I know of the current literature that I was immediately intrigued.

I find it odd how quickly some humans discount genetics/evolution and assume they are somehow exempt from the natural patterns that affect all living beings.

Couldn't you say the same thing about discounting the impact of environmental factors that affect all living things?

They've already done loads of twin studies. IQ is 50-80% heritable.

Twin studies exist; the major component of heredity is, unsurprisingly enough, genetic. For intelligence, it's anywhere between 50 and 80%. Given a strong political opposition to such conclusions, I'd expect it's actually underrated.

Where does this idea where you can only inherit looks and physical attributes from you parents, but anything connected to smarts is magically only defined by the environment comes from?

>genuinely smart people completely mess up personal areas of their life by refusing to think

This really reminds me of some guy I used to work with. He would spew random madness like people don't really need to eat because alive is an arbitrary state. I really have no idea how he functioned outside of his CS job.

He was also annoying at work because I would say things like the customer needs this then he would retort with some more madness like "well if you think about it blah blah the customer doesn't really matter." An I would just have to be like "ok thats great just get your feature assignments done on time". through gritted teeth. He did always get his work done.

The pedant is like a man living zeno's paradox of Achilles and the Tortoise.

You'll never get anywhere pedantically deconstructing things with no bounds.

Yeah I always said he is either going to be dead in a dariwin award level situation or destroy the world.

He currently works at Northrop Grumman so not looking good for us.

Ironic that there's several assumptions around things you've tried to logic out without looking at research.

>I think this is why depression rates are higher in more intelligent people. There's a better ability to comprehend and change your life, but that usually doesn't translate to the willpower and wisdom needed to do so.

Other possibilities:

- intelligent people have a history of being bullied and develop anxiety/depression from that

- they struggle with impossibly high expectations placed on them

- genes associated with intelligence increase risk of mental illness

- they rely too much on their intellect at an early age and fail to develop other important skills

- intelligent people may be more arrogant and have difficulty maintaining friendships

- a higher correlation of neurodivergence and the difficulties of living in a world not designed for them

> Ironic that there's several assumptions around things you've tried to logic out without looking at research.

Yes, exactly! I'm aware of it and can't stop doing it. You do it too I bet. It's a very annoying flaw in the human psyche.

edit: to be clear, you can stop. It requires some energy to open up your mind though, so you can't do it forever or you'll burn out, at least in my experience.

The other alternative is that this is not actually true. I’m having trouble finding any evidence that intelligence is correlated with depression.

Maybe it's sampling bias, then.

Intelligent people are more likely to realize they're depressed, go online, talk about depression, and meet other intelligent people who are also depressed?

"Growing up I was top of my class/district (same as my parents and theirs, which really suggests a genetic component).

No it doesn't. It implicates an inheritable component, just not necessarily a genetic one. Education, wealth, culture, prosperity, etc.

> Education, wealth, culture, prosperity, etc.

Wow, would you think it’s possible that there is a correlation between intelligent people and groups which create education, wealth, culture, prosperity, etc.?

Interesting bit about limits, I'm in a similar boat. But beside the social aspect of reaching groups of stronger people, something that changed is that my brain used to grok everything out of the blue, and one day.. it didn't.[0] It's not that things became harder but as if a big wall of confusion appeared, while other were still seeing clearly (or so it seems to my panicked eyes). During the years I managed to climb stairs I couldn't before, so it's not a matter of being able to grok things, but what became out of phase with college level content in my brain that killed any speed.

[0] for instance, I was top of my class not by choice but merely because I enjoyed reading all the things all the time because it was so natural, so pleasurable. That pleasure is far away most of the time now.

The emotional / personal aspect of abuse of "thinking" is also interesting.

Any idea why that happened? Did you fall down or something?

No, nothing physical or traumatic. The 'one day' was a figure of speech, it was the post high-school -> college transition. I became too lazy before, college through a lot more stuff at once, and it was more about very abstract principles rather than usual objects. You don't use a function, you imagine all functions on highly dimensional spaces .. also psychologically I wasn't used being behind the pack, stress and negative emotion will make you trip faster.

There's also something about how college material is presented maybe, it's a bit obfuscated behind notations. Or maybe that's just me not being in sync with high level thinking anymore. As a kid I loved all weird notations without feeling lost.

I can totally relate with everything being interesting, and then not. School went from easy to horrifying.

> To make wise decisions, you need to have the proper mindstate to make genuine "human" decisions, rather than using just your intelligence.

I recognize this as empathy. It is something of a superpower when used to its full potential.

It’s more than that. I’d argue there are “IQs” for culture (what’s the best outcome in a meta sense), power (what words/actions lead to maintaining dominance), social (how does everyone likely feel and react to what I say, related to power) and many more.

So undervalued by many.

Not only genes, but certain memes can be inherited also without any DNA.

> I think this is why depression rates are higher in more intelligent people.

It's not. Intelligence is negatively correlated to both anxiety and depression.

>Genetic loci shared between major depression and intelligence with mixed directions of effect[0]

>Although intelligence conferred no consistent independent effects on depression, it did increase the risk for depression across samples once neuroticism was adjusted for.[1]

>Those with high IQ had higher risk for psychological disorders (RR 1.20 - 223.08). High IQ was associated with higher risk for physiological diseases (RR 1.84 - 4.33).[2]

[0]https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-020-01031-2

[1]https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5486156/

[2]https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016028961...!

[3]https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/bad-news-for-the-...

I guess one way to look at this is that it's risky having a higher-performance brain. Kind of like how a sports car breaks down more often than a basic sedan or wagon.

they just form all kinds of delusions that they can prove to themselves

Perhaps this is another manifestation of the fear of failure that prevents some smart people from taking chances. E.g., admitting they were wrong and the normies were right would mean they aren’t smart after all, so they entrench and apply every brain cell to convincing themselves they are right, to the point of delusion.

>same as my parents and theirs, which really suggests a genetic component

Were you raised by your parents?