"Charles Brown" wrote:
>Seems to me the sinister, deeper message is something like "see, we even say
the Royal >family has genes for lower intelligence in its history. So, the
notion of genetic determination >of intelligence is not elitist or racist,
otherwise why would we say it impacts the Royals ?"
I agree -- and it certainly helps that any Royals who might be impacted are dead or obscure enough that it won't be considered important.
>Leaving aside the false theory of genetic determination of intelligence for
a moment...
And what a theory! Have you heard of this supposed "link" mentioned in the article before? Or what the "treatment" of the Japanese man was?
(From the original Sunday Times article): <<The link between genetics and IQ scores was found only four years ago, when the primary differences between a group of American children with IQs of 130 and another group with IQs of 82 was a single gene, EST00083. <snip> Mark Thomas, a genetics lecturer at University College London, said there was hope for anyone who had the gene. A Japanese man treated for a similar condition saw his IQ immediately increase by 20 points. >>
This sounds completely off-the-wall to me. K.Mickey