[froobius]

See also: "Major IQ differences in identical twins linked to schooling, challenging decades of research" [1] [2]

I.e. the idea that IQ is some innate fixed quality has evidence against it. It seems obvious that this is the case, given that people get their children tutors so they can do better at IQ tests to get into schools...

[1] https://www.psypost.org/major-iq-differences-in-identical-tw...

[2] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S000169182...

[Agraillo]

> The most striking finding came from the 10 pairs with “very dissimilar” educational experiences. In this group, the average IQ difference was 15.1 points. This gap is approaching the average difference seen between two randomly selected, unrelated individuals, which is about 17 points

> The authors note some limitations to their work. The group with “very dissimilar” education contained only 10 twin pairs. While this represents all such published individual data from the last century, it is a small sample size

Thanks, the study is interesting, but needs further research.

[zahlman]

There isn't an idea that "IQ is some innate fixed quality". There are two separate actual ideas being conflated there: that intelligence is an innate fixed quality (which is more or less definitional), and that IQ accurately measures intelligence (it doesn't, and we already knew that, but it's the best we have).

[froobius]

> There isn't an idea that "IQ is some innate fixed quality"

Actually yes there is; I have come across many people who believe this, specifically saying that IQ is fixed.

> that intelligence is an innate fixed quality

I would also disagree with this — intelligence can be increased, (e.g. through education, training, and practice), and also decreased, (e.g. by lifestyle / environment).