Mine is 132 and my gf's is 143. Our immediate families probably average 125
1,000
1.00Is this a bug or does @EntropyBot know about the paternal age effect on de novo mutations hehe
@RobinGreen Depends on the culture. In cultures that treat intelligence as though it determines moral worth, yes. In healthier cultures where it's just one trait among many others like height, charisma, physical attractiveness, musical talent, etc. it's not generally considered offensive to acknowledge that some people have more of one trait than others.
@IsaacKing I don't think acknowledging it would be necessarily the offensive part, although that might also offend the child, I guess. I think the really offensive part would be publicly implying that you expect your child to be intelligent, which would imply that a child that was not intelligent was a disappointment, in some sense.
@RobinGreen I think you're still considering intelligence as more important or noteworthy than other traits. If I told my child that based on genetic averages I expected them to be 5'10 and they turned out to only be 5'8, that doesn't seem particularly offensive.
Of course the fact that Jonathan made a market about IQ and not any other trait implies that they too find it more noteworthy...
@IsaacKing You have to view from this from the perspective of an intellectually disabled child. If the child even understood what the market meant, and that it was referring to him/her, then they might consider intelligence very important and might be very touchy about their lack of it.
Of course, that is the "most upsetting" scenario, and the child might just have an IQ of 129 or something...
@RobinGreen I don't see why that's worth factoring in. If I have a midget child then they indeed might be touchy about their height, but that's not going to stop me from discussing their potential height before they're even born, that seems ridiculous...