'@txag70' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritability_of_IQ
Twin studies in US were very convenient in this regard, it's probably as close to clean experiment as psychology gets. Not only it raises the issue of eugenics, but combined with existence of distinct genetic population it also raises the specter of scientific racism. Also some people don't want to accept the idea of "I am not smarter than everyone else and there is no way to fix it", so garbage like "emotional IQ" or "intelligence is a social construct" becomes popular.
Also also, children of close relative suffer significant drop in IQ, so that would put cultures that promote marriage between cousins (insert joke about rednecks, but I'm looking at Middle East) have to be considered objectively detrimental. Guess how well that would be received in social studies class.
Technically, young Earth creationism is not that far away from theory of virtual universe. If God is omniscient and omnipotent, he could create Earth 6000 years ago to appear much older. Like brand new pre-torn jeans, only more convincing.
It's a result of mode of thinking that can be observed in some moon hoax debates, and it works both ways. Two sides of argument have at some point to assume that they don't know and can't prove some specifics - i.e. while it's absolutely known that spacecraft was in orbit of the Moon, there is no way to know if it carried people or not. Those who go with official story see no reason to doubt that Armstrong has made that small step, deniers see that there is no absolute proof that he did. Each side claims that other is freaking stupid, no one sees need to change opinion, and only outcome of this debate are wasted time and rising arterial pressure.
317
'@txag70' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritability_of_IQ
Twin studies in US were very convenient in this regard, it's probably as close to clean experiment as psychology gets. Not only it raises the issue of eugenics, but combined with existence of distinct genetic population it also raises the specter of scientific racism. Also some people don't want to accept the idea of "I am not smarter than everyone else and there is no way to fix it", so garbage like "emotional IQ" or "intelligence is a social construct" becomes popular.
Also also, children of close relative suffer significant drop in IQ, so that would put cultures that promote marriage between cousins (insert joke about rednecks, but I'm looking at Middle East) have to be considered objectively detrimental. Guess how well that would be received in social studies class.
Technically, young Earth creationism is not that far away from theory of virtual universe. If God is omniscient and omnipotent, he could create Earth 6000 years ago to appear much older. Like brand new pre-torn jeans, only more convincing.
It's a result of mode of thinking that can be observed in some moon hoax debates, and it works both ways. Two sides of argument have at some point to assume that they don't know and can't prove some specifics - i.e. while it's absolutely known that spacecraft was in orbit of the Moon, there is no way to know if it carried people or not. Those who go with official story see no reason to doubt that Armstrong has made that small step, deniers see that there is no absolute proof that he did. Each side claims that other is freaking stupid, no one sees need to change opinion, and only outcome of this debate are wasted time and rising arterial pressure.