Perhaps he was "thinking this as he read it" because I actually use the fitness analogy at some point myself!
-
e.g. in fitness example, "faculty physiology" is /true/ (muscles and heart are distinct etc) yet we see pos correlations
cpu speed and ram size are distinct "faculties," but i'm sure the two are correlated in "population" of existing computers
-
-
That's an argument regarding *why* they correlate. Different to what laymen or educated people expected/expect
-
I'm glad if in your bubble(non-pejoratively,as opposed to mine) it doesn't happen, but I've heard several times people...
-
expecting that if X person/kid it's bad at maths, then at least he should be good at reading, and/or viceversa
-
hey, if you predict IQ from other knowledge about kid and condition on prediction, that's a perfectly good inference :P
-
more seriously, i know people argued hard against positive manifold, but do we know they wouldn't do the same for fitness?
-
i can easily imagine my alt. universe having a fitness!Gould, et al. are you saying you find that hard to to imagine?
-
no, I'm saying it's an important omission because part of the point of the book is to argue against those! and that they…
-
(Gould, Gardner, Fodor etc.) have more of an impact than you think. AND that it isn't as obvious g factor is a given.
- 7 more replies
New conversation -
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.