Talk:Hereditarianism

middle position
A middle position argues that an organism inherits only alleles, and that the interaction of alleles with environment creates phenotypes.

This should not necessarily be called a middle position. See Nature versus nurture. There are instances where it is obviously wrong (Nature_vs_nurture).

So, we should reword that. --Rikurzhen 20:58, August 6, 2005 (UTC)

scope
the scope of hereditarianism is broader than intelligence, and it could be called a side in the nature vs nurture debate. for example, personality is a stronger case for the hereditarian position than intelligence is. Also, people like Steven Pinker or Noam Chomsky could be classified as hereditarians. --Rikurzhen 21:00, August 6, 2005 (UTC)

neo-Darwinians
there's an obvious overlap between the neo-Darwinians and the hereditarians. someone has probably commented on this. --Rikurzhen 21:36, August 6, 2005 (UTC)

Heritability of intelligence range
I have concerns about this sentence in the article:

Many readers will interpret this incorrectly as "heritability is estimated to range from 20% in infancy to 80% in adulthood" rather than the correct "... and the highest estimates for heritability in adulthood are 80%".

Separately, including only the high-end estimate of 80% may create an anchoring effect.

Together, these issues are likely to result in readers coming away with a higher heritability estimate than is justified.

I suggest writing instead the central range of estimates for adulthood heritability (57% to 73% ?), and separately, the central range of estimates for one other chosen age. Jruderman (talk) 02:06, 13 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Struck a range that I had copied from the lead of Heritability of IQ, because it's more of an "oldish range" than a "central range". Both articles could benefit from having their numbers updated to reflect current scientific consensus. Jruderman (talk) 02:31, 13 July 2024 (UTC)