Post #1935229

Replies (1)

• @daannii@lemmy.world 2026-04-28 00:13

  Many people/news outlets present genetic data as "effects" or as percentage of a trait. Like if someone scored 80% on a trait, people say genes determined 30% of that score. Which is incorrect. But this interpretation is pushed all the time. I see it a lot with intelligence IQ score. Yes intelligence is genetic but only 30% of variability is predicted by genetics. And if you think about it. That's only for people with an IQ of 70 to 130 (1 standard deviation). For the really smart people and the really dumb people, genetics has a lower ability to predict variance. The reason genes aren't as predictive as you would think they would be , is just like my example of height. If the environment doesn't allow for potential to be fulfilled, it won't be. Human development has what's called "sensitive periods" . Where if some function isn't learned by that age, it likely will never be mastered. Because the brain does a lot of pruning at young age. If you aren't using it, you lose it. This is why learning a second language is hard as an adult and easy as a child. So taking that into account. You can see how limited genetics are for determining an outcome of a random child. It certainly has an impact. But it is limited by the environment. How many amazing geniuses are born every day in 3rd world countries that have the potential to solve big world problems who will never reach that level because the stimulation they need to reach that potential is unavailable to them?

  Open ##1935230