tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9104678730176687014.post6820967216507878040..comments2014-12-12T18:07:42.274-05:00Comments on Seminar in Composition : Lewontin Article Essay 2 Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16302919444091859459noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9104678730176687014.post-37886866220716710042014-10-26T15:37:05.915-04:002014-10-26T15:37:05.915-04:00You needed a more focused argument in your introdu...You needed a more focused argument in your introduction. It reads like an attempt to summarize some of Lewontin's findings, but focusing on now instead of twenty years ago. You want a much narrower focus in a short essay.<br /><br />Throughout this essay, you generalizes too quickly and easily, rather than focusing on the task at hand. You and I may both easily believe that the motives of the authors of this paper are much like the motivies Lewontin ascribes to researchers on intelligence in general, and you do show a reasonable understanding of Lewontin's text. But I would have liked to see mroe analysis of your chosen article.<br /><br />How to do this? I can only speculate, without having read the article. Where I would likely start, though, is by asking some basic questions about credibility. When IQ tests are really problematic, how can we realistically be confident that we are measuring "intelligence" precisely enough to measure it in .02% deviations.<br /><br />Lewontin would doubtless question whether "general" intelligence exists in the first place. But even if it does, can we really measure it so precisely?<br /><br />I do see improvement in your use of Lewontin, but you need to focus on the basics a little more. Remember that you are making an argument, and in this case you were making an argument about an article using Lewontin - not just presenting a bunch of information from Lewontin, which is what you come dangerously close to doing.Adamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16302919444091859459noreply@blogger.com