HMGA2 Gene Linked to Brain Size and Intelligence... Predisposition to Being Smarter?

In a recent study(World largest brain study to date), it has became apparent that not only the physical characteristics in regards to shape and size of the brain are related to specific genes, but now also includes intelligence.

"Our individual centers couldn’t review enough brain scans to obtain definitive results,” said Thompson, who is also a professor of psychiatry at the Semel Institute for Neuroscience and Human Behavior at UCLA. “By sharing our data with Project ENIGMA, we created a sample large enough to reveal clear patterns in genetic variation and show how these changes physically alter the brain."

The article then goes on to say...

DNA is comprised of four bases: A, C, T and G. People whose HMGA2 gene held a letter “C” instead of “T” on that location of the gene possessed larger brains and scored more highly on standardized IQ tests.

Link to article:
New Genes Linked to Brain Size, Intelligence
www.sciencedaily.com...

This is extremely important, for it brings a multitude of questions to the table... many of which deserve aspects of morality in using the information for 'the good of the people'.

As we all know, every little scientific finding, eventually leads to a justification in reasoning, and then is often applied in regards to innovation, advancing as a society, and the way that we view another in determining the best means for a better tomorrow.

This now brings such topics to the table... such as the taboo 'Eugenics'

Eugenics is the "applied science or the bio-social movement which advocates the use of practices aimed at improving the genetic composition of a population", usually referring to the manipulation of human populations.[2][3] The origins of the concept of eugenics began with certain interpretations of Mendelian inheritance, and the theories of August Weismann.[4] Historically, many of the practitioners of eugenics viewed eugenics as a science, not necessarily restricted to human populations; this embraced the views of Darwinism and Social Darwinism.

en.wikipedia.org...

Another important topic... is the recognition that Nature and not souly 'Nurture' has an very important role as to the apparent 'intelligence' of individuals. Which then brings up important questions, as to the way that we see and treat another.

Is it now possible to reason that any observation of another person who appears to be less intelligent, is not to be correlated with the observed persons work ethics, want or desire to being more 'intelligent'. I say this, because I have witnessed that many people think that those who are on the lower side of the 'intelligence' scale, do so willingly.
Can we now just simply say, "That person is less intelligent, and it is not their fault"?
How far can this paradigm be taken, and used as sustenance in any argument in the defense of those who appear or even in fact are 'less intelligent'

It is important to recognize the difference between intelligence and wisdom and morality, so they not be included in any following conversations... that is... for there's only a limited amount of information out so far. Yes, reasoning, justifying, and emotions are in fact a construct of the brain... and may plausibly be argued to adhere to the very same principal. Yet, I feel that some caution is to be taken before addressing this aspect of the conversation, for 'Nurture' plays a significant role in the strengthening of neural connections in relation to behavioral patterns...

I'm not by any means all that well versed on the topic... so maybe if there is anybody that is, I would appreciate any input that you may contribute.

So what does ATS think!?! This is big news, and its importance will undoubtedly not go unnoticed in the coming future.

I think those without the gene can raise their frequency and develop it vibrationally.

Intelligence goes far beyond just a gene and DNA because there is emotional intelligence, moral intelligence, a greater capacity for creativity, spiritual intelligence... these all factor in with regard to how "intelligent" someone is perceived.

I've met Indians who have lived in the wilderness who had more intelligence about nature than anyone who picked up a book or got a degree.

Not beating on you OP, but I think it's apples and oranges. A bigger brain doesn't mean the soul intends to use it.

~Namaste

Originally posted by knightsofcydonia
I think those without the gene can raise their frequency and develop it vibrationally.

Wtf are you talking about?

Originally posted by SonOfTheLawOfOne
Intelligence goes far beyond just a gene and DNA because there is emotional intelligence, moral intelligence, a greater capacity for creativity, spiritual intelligence... these all factor in with regard to how "intelligent" someone is perceived.

I've met Indians who have lived in the wilderness who had more intelligence about nature than anyone who picked up a book or got a degree.

Not beating on you OP, but I think it's apples and oranges. A bigger brain doesn't mean the soul intends to use it.

~Namaste

What the... ? An entire post, constructed of faulty reasoning. EPIC!

1. In regards to your little rant about the bounds of intelligence, and how it is perceived.. LOL!

What was not understood by the following?

It is important to recognize the difference between intelligence and wisdom and morality, so they not be included in any following conversations... that is... for there's only a limited amount of information out so far. Yes, reasoning, justifying, and emotions are in fact a construct of the brain... and may plausibly be argued to adhere to the very same principal. Yet, I feel that some caution is to be taken before addressing this aspect of the conversation, for 'Nurture' plays a significant role in the strengthening of neural connections in relation to behavioral patterns...

Are you not aware of Nature vs Nurture? Did I stu stu stutter when I suggested that it is important to recognize that there is a difference between intelligence, wisdom, and morality?

'spiritual intelligence' oh geeze, are we getting into the debate about who can and who can't hear the 'holy spirit'?

2. Could it not be argued that your Indian friends may have a variation of this HMGA2 Gene and other relating genes that allowed for this supposed 'more intelligence' as you put it.

3. So you make claim that...

A bigger brain doesn't mean the soul intends to use it.

Which version of 'the soul' are you referencing?
Divine(union with god)
Socrates version
Hindu version
Jainism
Zoroastrianism

I would even go as far to suggest, that independent on you clarifying which defining characteristics you apply... that the 'soul' does intend to use all of them. Maybe a little temperance in regards to action, a touch of virtue and a recognition of vices.

If this is apple and oranges, are you talking about bananas here? For it sure feels like it.

Originally posted by SonOfTheLawOfOne
Intelligence goes far beyond just a gene and DNA because there is emotional intelligence, moral intelligence, a greater capacity for creativity, spiritual intelligence... these all factor in with regard to how "intelligent" someone is perceived.

I've met Indians who have lived in the wilderness who had more intelligence about nature than anyone who picked up a book or got a degree.

Not beating on you OP, but I think it's apples and oranges. A bigger brain doesn't mean the soul intends to use it.

~Namaste

Your argument here is self-defeating with the constant use of the added word "intelligence." Don't you understand? All of your particular types of intelligence you list feed back to the basic element of intelligence. Your last point about Indians living in the wilderness is definitely true to some extent, but has zero implications in this argument.

Maybe you should think of generic intelligence as you would money in the bank. If you inherited it, great! You have a headstart on the poor slob that got zero and must--if at all--do it the hard way.

This reminds me of one of my favorite movies: GATTACA.

Test to see who's got what mapped where, and give those most able to exploit and thrive on advanced opportunities those opportunities while the rest go to public school and wind up in public school appropriate career fields.

I'm not condoning such. I'm just saying if the potential to use this that way is there, it's not too unreasonable to suspect someone somewhere will be keen to use it such.

Then there's the aspect of purposeful manipulation. Sometimes stupid workers make happier, more obedient and easier to manage workers.
Those that get the T or the C then get trained from birth for their expected roles.

As said, I'm not endorsing such. I'm just making statements of possibilities that arise on the ethical front.

I could see something similar occurring if there's a longevity gene discovered that can be manipulated.
Stupid long-lived workers make great workers where cost of training due attrition is low.
Short lived geniuses may be preferrable to long lived geniuses in case such genius gets ideas outside their station, training, or purpose that could endanger the ruling faction's stability.

I suppose I'm just prefacing ideas for a GATTACA II.