but it extrapolates that to the level of the whole society, implying that reduced fertility among talented social climbers has a societal net of "shredding IQ". I don't think that claim is justified because it discounts influx of new talented people.
> if you're proposing a link like city dwellers retiring to the country and having more kids, no, i'm not. i'm saying that the very large population size of the country (hundreds of millions+, full order of magnitude larger than city) makes this kind of calculus useless.
-
-
what mechanism suggests we should consider IQ to be a highly conserved quantity in large populations? what mechanism suggests that new high IQ individuals are not emerging from large populations at a faster rate than the city shreds them?
-
answering either of those questions would be repeating myself.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
It doesn't, though. The numbers are irrefutable. The universities and yes, cities, are large enough to do it. College is a double-digit-percent affair.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.