The child genius comment is not laughable. A genius is always tied to a particular skill given in a cultural context. For example playing a piano, or juggling. It is possible that a child is born with certain innate physical qualities that help him in whatever he practices. Like being fair, or strong, tall, etc... But to assume that any 5 year old learned to play piano as some kind of a genetic gift is far more ludicrous. It takes hard practice to perfect your body and mind to work in unison for any particular task, approximately the same for everyone bar perhaps the effects of personal motivation and rigor of the exercise.
With the exception of people with disorders that in some way may make them amazingly good at certain tasks, like having eidetic memory.
Completely laughable, and completely unverifiable. The only passable tests of such things that I am aware of are studies of separated twins, which have indicated quite clearly, time and time again, that variance in intelligence is attributable in great part to inheritance. There's no arguing around such tests--bring up as many chimpanzee breeds that you want.
Meaning that "intelligence" is largely learned, mind is an empty plate of neurons waiting to be connected.
The oldest error in the discussion. Start your elementary education in the subject here:
http://www.amazon.com/Blank-Slate-Modern-Denial-Nature/dp/06...
Pinker spends an enormous amount of time bowing down to the antique emotionalisms of the age, and so the book shouldn't be too offensive to the weak-hearted.
EDIT:
user: politrix
created: 1 day ago