> Give me a dozen healthy infants, well-formed, and my own

Didn't think I'd ever see Watson posted here. Yeah, so long as those kids are born of reasonable genetic stock, I'm quite sure he's right. I don't think that should be very shocking for most people.

>>2280474
Some people are born "normal" but simply are genetically incapable of being extremely intelligent.

Can you turn a baby of pygmy ancestry into a world-class sprinter?
No.

>>2280474
>I am going beyond my facts and I admit it, but so have the advocates of the contrary
yeah, the fact that other people make unsubstantiated claims doesn't give you licence to do the same.

Also, the weight of scientific evidence says he's wrong.

>>2280474
Personally, I know that people are smarter than me. I saw it early in math/science, when certain people grasped things immediately but I required many hours of personal study to grasp the same concepts, so that while I was barely grasping last lesson and desperately paying as much attention and trying as hard as possible, things simply didn't click for me like other people. I put in many hours during lunch, afterschool, all the homework, and still I struggled for years. I finally understood that-at least when it comes to math and science, I am not as naturally capable as others. I don't grasp the concepts, I'm slow with doing things in my head, I always took the maximum amount of time on every test, and I really just didn't have the natural talent for it no matter how much I tried and no matter how much it pained me to do so average when I had worked so hard to be great, like I was at everything else really. Music? I was always top of the class. Writing? Multiple teachers pulled me aside throughout the years to compliment my writing. I was the best writer in my class at every school I went to from elementary to university.

But fuck, I cannot do a math problem. Idk what to tell you.

>>2280786
Counterpoint, I was one of those kids who grasped things immediately in those fields. By the end of highschool, I was failing them, do to a disruptive homelife and lack of interest.

The above quote doesn't say that he'll make you the finest doctor, lawyer, etc. That's obviously not true, no matter who you select because countless parents set out to create the ideal x, y, and z to fullfill their ambitions and fail. I think the most obvious evidence this proposition though is Jews, Sikhs, and Orientals. Either they're all EXCEPTIONALLY capable, especially the oldest son, or just pressuring someone to be a doctor works wonders.

>>2280786

I was exactly the same. Now I'm studying Astrophysics. The thing about Math and Science, is its now about how much you know or what you grasp but how you think. You can be the most autistic genius ever with all the marker pens and transparent glass in the world, but if you don't grasp a certain mode of thinking, if you can't look at things from a different perpective, then you won't get anywhere.

That's why Feynman, despite not being the smartest scientist ever, acheived more than most, because he noticed things that no-one else noticed and wasn't afraid to throw away the rule book and try something out of left-field. He also LISTENED to people, something most autismos never learn to do. That's why Krauss, despite being a genius, is stuck writing books for plebs and debating against christianity and philosophy instead of doing anything useful.

>>2280805
>just pressuring someone to be a doctor works wonders.

It REALLY does. I read a paper on Indian immigrants in Scandinavia and the massive amounts of pressure form parents led to high achievement mainly since the parents wanted their kids to not be treated badly by locals and to brag about their kids.

>>2280786
you just have to learn it in a different way that suits you.
I knew tutor who can teach math concepts to anyone at impressive speeds even folk with dyscalculia.

>>2280474

of course not.

he's pen-ultimately retarded in fact.

>give me 12 random healthy kids and I'll turn one of them into a nuclear engineer

Not statistically you won't. Sorry guy, you're actually stupid.

>>2280939
>not statistically you won't
do you have any source backing this up?

>>2280474
Pure social constructivist/Rousseauian garbage ideology.

>>2282776
Not the guy you're talking to, but roughly half of the kids are going to to have an IQ below average. You don't turn these into nuclear engineers.