Here’s a different take: The extent to which you can correlate genes to income in a society, is a direct measure of the unfairness and class stratification of that society.If we assume, as I do, that most genetic correlations in the behavioral genetics realm are due to population stratification, then we know that any genetic correlations would demonstrate ways in which the society is stratified. This could be in obvious ways such as racial delineations, but might also include more subtle classist issues (He/She is not from the right family...) and would be an even better way to measure more covert discrimination. By the way, I think this is provable in the sense that other societies will have entirely different loci correlated to income, a fact that will cause a lot of mental gymnastics to explain away.
If we can't prove the causality of the genes flagged in such studies, shouldn't we assume that they are an indication, of an unfair stratification of the society? If we could rid ourselves of all such genetic commonalities, wouldn't that lead us to a true meritocracy? Therefore, wouldn't it make sense and be more fair to give job and college admission preferences to those with the LOWEST polygenic scores for income? As the very "not racist" individuals who embraced this study and took me to task on Twitter pointed out, shouldn't we pursue the truth wherever it happens to lead?
I bet these studies will continue to be done until these DNA companies stops being which might take a while
ReplyDeletehello i'm the guy from the last blog post. Here's the link to the dumb Icelandic study I would love for you to cover https://www.pnas.org/content/114/5/E727 sorry about the delay read a while so it took time to find
ReplyDeleteThis is interesting to show how GWAS correlations can fit whatever narrative we want, but not to make a serious point.
ReplyDeleteThe point is that the opposite of what they think they are showing is being shown. I'd call it a serious point, but going for a little irony.
Delete