From Carl Zimmer at New York Times:
In ‘Enormous Success,’ Scientists Tie 52 Genes to Human Intelligence
In a significant advance in the study of mental ability, a team of European and American scientists announced on Monday that they had identified 52 genes linked to intelligence in nearly 80,000 people.
These genes do not determine intelligence, however. Their combined influence is minuscule, the researchers said, suggesting that thousands more are likely to be involved and still await discovery. Just as important, intelligence is profoundly shaped by the environment. More.
So? Is this ambivalence an “enormous success” in science today?
If you still subscribe to the New York Times, please quit and save trees.
See also: Science fictions series 4: Naturalism and the human mind
Follow UD News at Twitter!
What definition of ‘gene’ do they use?
Dennis Noble’s definition?
What definition of ‘intelligence’ do they use?
How do they link –functionally and spatiotemporally– the two concepts at different developmental stages?
Anyone out there can answer these questions?
Dionisio – the paper is here: https://www.nature.com/ng/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ng.3869.html.
Bob O’H:
Thank you for the link.
BTW, did you read that paper yet?
Here’s a related article:
Any comments on this?
The abstract of the referenced article seems like either archaic pseudoscientific hogwash or low grade bovine excreta. Maybe both. It’s discouraging to see so much nonsense written out there. Perhaps the opinion could change after reading the entire article.
Where’s the beef?