Mira, there is much to respond to in your message. Do not have
enough time at the moment, but will make a few comments. If you
want to play the "dumb ass" about intelligence, as you are doing (in
my opinion) [e.g. "Then can we stop bothering to educate them?"], I
will join you in that game. I recommend that you do some reading on
the subject of intelligence. A couple of books I would recommend
are "Straight Talk about Mental Tests" and "Bias in Mental Testing".

Let me ask you if you consider yourself to be an intelligent woman?
Are you going to answer you don't know because you don't know what
the word "intelligent" means? Of course, to decide if someone
is "intelligent" requires a comparison of people in their abilty to
learn, to see cause and effect, to see differences and similarties
in things, to reason, etc. People will disagree about how to define
intelligence but they seem to agree that the word connotes the idea
that intelligence refers to the ability to learn [not everybody can
learn as much or as fast as other people], to see cause and effect,
to see analogies, to reason, etc. How about your friends? Do you
consider any of your friends to be intelligent? Do any of your
friends seem to be more intelligent than some of the others? If so,
why? Are your friends equally intelligent, in your opinion? If you
use "intelligent" to describe anyone, what do you mean?

How is intelligence measured? We all measure intelligence. When we
talk to people, we are evaluating their intelligence. Does the dr
use good logic, does he use good grammar? Our assessment of
intelligence is probably not as accurate as IQ tests, especially in
the case of certain indiviiduals. But intelligence can be more
reliably and validily measured with IQ tests. And it is interesting
that IQ scores correlate with certain measurements of brain
activity. Of coourse, there is a correrlation between intelligence
and academic achievement [except for maybe achiemvent in courses
such as black studies and women's studies]. And there is a
correlation between brain size and intelligence.

As for "genius", of course I know that people will disagree about
who is a genius. The word is a superlative. It signifies that the
speaker thinks the person who is called a genius is very exceptional
in his behavior, usually a creative behavior or a behavior involving
intellectual effort.

As for the word "madness", it might be a better word to describe
people who are said to "mentally ill". Often people wno are
labelled as mi, are angry. Of course, I understand how people
discredit or dehumanize people by calling them names. That is an
ancient tactic that logicians refer to as making "ad hominem"
arguments. And there is another term that I can't think of, but the
idea of "guilt by association" comes to mind. Some people will
complare people who study genetics (espcially human genetics)
to "Nazis". The Nazis had some great rocket scientists. Do you
think rocket science is a field that people should not study?
Because the Nazis misused their knowledge of rocket science?

Why do we need research on intelligence? To learn why some people
learn faster and can understand abstractions better than other
people. As well as for other reasons.

--- In thomasszaszdiscussion@yahoogroups.com, Mira <mirah@...> wrote:
>
> ozarkheretic wrote:
>
> > I would point out that "manic depression" may very well be
> > hereditary.
>
> I agree. The phenomenon is unique to organisms with human genes.
>
> > However, if md is a personality trait maybe it is a trait or
> > behavioral tendency that is inherited.
>
> If it is. And if it isn't? What is madness? Who is mad? Who
decides what
> is madness and what isn't?
>
> > For some reason Szasz seems to be very suspicious of "genetics".
>
> I don't know about Szasz, but I myself am quite suspicious of
> "genetics". After the mass murder of 400,000 psychiatric patients,
> 6,000,000 Jews, and I don't know how many Roma, Sinti,
homosexuals,
> people with dark skins, and others in the name of genetic purity,
I have
> become suspicious.
>
> > Galton's research on "genius" really led to the research on
> > "intelligence".
>
> Please define intelligence. Why do we need this research?
>
> > And actually Modern research has shown that "intelligence" is a
> > characteristic or trait that is primarily produced by heredity
or
> > genetics.
>
> Really? How has Modern research shown that?
>
> > People do not become intelligent because of the environments
they
> > grow up in.
> > They are intelligent
> > because of DNA that is transmitted to them by their parents.
>
> Then we can stop bothering to educate them?
>
> > A genius was a person who had made some
> > remarkable discovery in science.
>
> Who decides which discovery is remarkable? Egaz Moniz, for
instance,
> received a Nobel prize for "discovering" (inventing) lobotomy. Is
he a
> genius?
>
> > having a high IQ does not make a person a genius.
>
> What is IQ? How is it measured?
>
> The point is that words like madness and genius are not delineable
> facts. They are attributions and value judgments. You can be
> inconspicuous. You can be conspicuous. In the second case, people
who
> admire you will call you a genius. People who don't will call you
mad.
> These concepts are like beauty -- in the eye of the beholder.
>
> Mira
>