I now think you're allowing your own prejudices on this subject cloud what you're reading, and what you're saying in response. I think I was fairly clear in my position that genetics plays an important role in intelligence, specifically because we have no indication that the brain is exempt from the same physiological rules that the rest of the human body obeys.
| I think that you should look at the example of the polgar sisters...
I specifically covered edge cases in mentioning the impact of training on innate ability.
What does it mean that the brain "obeys the same physiological rules" that the body obeys? This point is incoherent.
My point is that yes, there is a genetic aspect to intelligence (duh), but that doesn't mean that there is a genetic component to how "fast" your brain is or how much "memory" you have. These could be emergent phenomena - not directly determinable.
Please tell me more specifically how my prejudices are clouding what I'm reading/saying. You didn't follow this point up.
| I think that you should look at the example of the polgar sisters...
I specifically covered edge cases in mentioning the impact of training on innate ability.