Quote:
Originally Posted by blankall
What the thinking here? I assume that this would support the idea that men are specialized for various roles within society due to a greater degree of variation in size, strength, intelligence, etc...
This would then support the theory that women are less able to fill those specialized roles? I suppose if the theory were true, you'd expect a male to be more likely to have a very high end intelligence, with females more likely to fall around the average. This could be equally damaging for men who would be perceived as below average intelligence and pigeon holed there.
|
Why the assumption that there's a political agenda at play? Greater male variability is a fact of genetics. This research was meant to use math to look into how that variance could play out with regards to intelligence.
Do we really want to assume science is always motivated by ideological and social agendas? Isn't that what global warming deniers accuse the climate scientists of - using dubious research to justify a political and economic agenda? How far do we want to go down the road of suppressing science just because it could be used to support controversial ideological positions?
Discovering how the world works, and making decisions about how we ought to behave, are two entirely different things. Keeping them separate is a cornerstone of the enlightenment and of the scientific method.
Quote:
Originally Posted by blankall
It's also very difficult to make any kind of test that is an accurate measure of intelligence, which has no single definition and is heavily influenced by bias.
|
Research has identified something known as general intelligence. The fact that it's controversial and some people are upset at the idea doesn't change the science.