Ihre Gene reichen einfach nicht aus, um zu erklären, wie intelligent Sie sind

I can’t read the article because it’s behind a paywall, but…genes, nature, nurture, influence and opportunity. Probably a little bit of all that. Nothing happens in a bubble. But a kid with specific genetics, raised in a well suited environment for that skill set, with good mentors and plenty of options. Well, that kid is gonna be a whip.

>Your Genes Are Simply Not Enough to Explain How Smart You Are

The title is, as usual, misleading about the content.

Turkheimer, a distinguished researcher of intelligence, is returning to an old battle he had with Charles Murray, a political scientist. Now first of all, contra the title, Murray nowhere claimed genes are all that’s needed to explain intelligence. He’s consistently stuck with the mainstream science that Turkheimer is just as aware of: that intelligence is more influenced by genes than by random chance and upbringing, but that the latter to also play their own roles. It’s nature, chance and nurture, in that order.

Here Turkheimer talks about to what extent we can go beyond observing that intelligence *is* to a large extent genetic: can we find the specific genes that explain differences in intelligence? And we can’t, yet. We’ve found some patterns of genes that predict some of the variability in educational achievement, but there’s a [large unexplained gap](https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/missing-heritability-much-more-than) still.

Fair’s fair, I’d say he’s won his bet with Dr. Murray. But don’t be mislead by the title: Murray never claimed intelligence is *only* genes; and Turkheimer won’t deny genes most likely play an important role.

Because they do. Genes play a very important role in who’s smart and who’s less smart.