The Socjournal A new media journal of sociology and society
DNA
Take the survey
Here is a short survey designed to capture our collective understanding of the nature of human intelligence. The question is simple, do you believe that human intelligence is genetically determined and if so, by what percentage. The survey is followed by a small set of demographic questions (i.e. age, gender, income, education). Please take the time to fill out the survey, but please only fill out the survey once, and please be honest.
Data from this survey will be presented publically for open and class discussion.
Take the survey
Interesting short survey…
I think the more we look at nurture/nature we will see they become so intertwined that they are almost indistinguishable. Some studies show that what is going on in your ancestors lives as they are developing genetic material for their prodigy can end up affecting generations three or four generations removed from them. Also, we have the potentiality in our genes which might be turned on/off at different times in our lives.
The idea of nature/nurture might be a false dichotomy. How we behave now affects us, people around us and potentially people we will never know….so our focus should be optimizing our society’s structure and our individual/group behavior….our genes will thank us.
It would be good to have environmental studies/ecology studies as an area of interest listed..
I find the sociology label limiting these days; likewise interdisciplinary could be an option..
the early debates also argued that the percentage of infleunce differed based on the age of the child….so as i recall the wild boy of averogn demonstrated some growth based on nurture because he was under a certain age when discovered and nurtured; whereas other feral children were more limited in their progress because their exposure, especially to language and basic socialization, came later in life..after the age of?// its probably in your textbook…these rather old discoveries were of course producst of their age too and should be critically assessed…
.
I think what is missing in the survey…is an individuals drive for intelligence…how bad do they want it…what motivates them….because I believe that in and of itself could tip the scale to weighing more heavily on the nurture side….genetics is a huge part of it…because you either possess the ability to learn or you don’t…but what motivates you to learn is something completely all together different and can therefore favor nurture ;o)
Would it be too strange a thought to suggest we aren’t all the same? I’d like to believe that those who are truly intelligent are (much) less likely to be influenced by their environment. In these cases, genes could provide 90% of their intelligence and the environment and its effects becomes more and more obsolete. Those who aren’t as gifted, even say below average IQ (and who’s to say that is an accurate way of determining intelligence, too…) are much more susceptible to environmental effects. It has a MUCH greater chance of rubbing off on them… around 80% nurture then, in some cases here.
I am really glad to see a survey of this nature on this website even though, it did ask for a set percent for all cases. I chose my percentage partially unwillingly… Thanks though, really, none-the-less!
Not so strange at all. In fact, a brilliant idea ,and probably true. Though the question then becomes what kind of “intelligence” are you talking about. There’s different types. Are you talking about the kind of intelligence that makes you good at taking tests, or street smarts, or musical intelligence, or what. Like genetics, intelligence is a slippery (and largely ideological) concept!
Are the survey results out yet?
Anyway, I think any collective understanding captured by this survey would be rather limited. Some flexibility in answering the questions would have been useful, as in an ‘other’ option.
More importantly, the main survey question itself is rather simple: “do you believe that human intelligence is genetically determined and if so, by what percentage”. Determining the genetic contribution to variance in intelligence within a population should take into account relevant factors such as age, family environment, socio-economic status, education, etc., as well as the interaction of these factors that may or may not reinforce the genetic effect. And in the absence of some other available standard measure of intelligence, IQ would have to do.
But I suppose you’re not doing this study, but are rather just after a general gauge of what people might think. Whether the result would be meaningful is entirely another question.
Thanks for making me think about this for a moment, albeit belatedly, Mike
i haven’t tabulated the survey yet. and you are right, there are serious limitations on this “study.” Its more just a gauge of how people who read this journal think about genetics and IQ, a foil to start a discussion on the topic at some future date. I thin though that whatever the results say they will be generalizable to the population. I suspect most people have pretty much the same perspective on genetics and IQ and that’s what I’m aiming to capture.