An intelligence quotient (IQ) is a total score derived from a set of standardized tests or subtests designed to assess human intelligence.[1]
What exactly are you claiming? That it’s not a test to measure intellect? That IQ is pseudoscience? Or that it’s not specifically generalized intellect?
IQ is not a measurement of human intellect in general.
I don’t think there’s a scientific consensus of what IQ really measures.
Regarding correlation with success, I should have specified that the correlation still exists even when controlling for birth environment.
I would say that would be extremely difficult to definitively prove. IQ is more of a social study than a hard science, typically this kinda data is more suggestive than it is definite.
Never studied for them, they seemed like mostly simple pattern recognition and general logic questions, which I’ve never really thought you could even study for.
There are a few different tests that are supposed to clinically measure IQ. Most of them are more complex than pattern recognition and most all of them are administered by some sort of clinician, which can also influence outcomes.
But general intellect, as far as I can tell (and maybe my understanding of it is wrong), is what influences your ability to shift to a new field and gain expertise in that. Years alone don’t cut it. In my own field, I’ve seen software engineers who can’t program for shit, let alone make any architectural decisions after a decade - and ones that are pretty competent after 2-3 years.
I would say that the ability to gain expertise is generally hard to differentiate with the motivation to gain expertise. What we can empirically prove is that time spent practicing a skill is how we gain expertise in most any skill.
In fact, it’s more like ranges of aptitudes. I have great aptitude for STEM, pretty decent aptitude for languages, and absolutely none for arts. No drawing, no singing, etc. No matter how much practice I get and how much practice I got in my childhood.
It could be that you just perceive yourself being at being better at stem because you enjoy practicing the skills required for stem. People generally gain experience faster in skill sets they enjoy or skills they perceive thems to excel at.
There’s just skills I won’t learn in 10 years of practice, and skills I pick up rapidly, and it’s been that way since childhood.
Again, this could be self fulfilling process. If you don’t think you will excel at something you may not fully engage in the process, or even self sabotage the process.
think IQ in particular unfairly prioritizes understanding of language and logic, over artful skills and, e.g emotional intelligence (which is measured by EQ I guess).
I think for this to be true your claim would have to be that emotional intellect is devoid of logic or language…which seems fairly self evidently incorrect.
My main point that I wanted to make was that some people are naturally more gifted, and just faster learners, than others.
Or people are better at learning things they are self motivated to learn about, and that society influences what skills we find valuable or “intellectual”.
In short, what we can empirically prove about intellect is usually environmental in nature, and what we can only theorize about heritability cannot be differentiated from other variabilities that may correlate with that theory.
I’m not generally interested in comparing IQ results between countries or even for people of differing first language though so these don’t especially concern me so long as I can be sure a study averts the issue.
My point is the variability between test groups calls into question the reliability of IQ as a concept as a whole. If IQ is an innate measurement of intellect for humans in general, then the reliability of the test shouldn’t be culturally constrained.
for instance, it correlates well with success (level of education (eventually) reached, or $ in a capitalist society) and I’d be surprised to find any major journal publishing a paper which disputes that.
Yes, but I could make the same claim about a plethora of other correlations with more confidence like having wealthy parents.
Wait, do people actually study for IQ tests? Why?
The same reason mensa is a thing. People like to toot their own horn.
reckon general intellect does matter. In a world where your job might not exist in 5 years because lol AI, it’s best to be able to adapt fast. Specialize, yes, but one day your specialization will be useless. Best case scenario, it’s after you’ve retired.
To a certain extent yes, but no one can be an expert at everything. There just isn’t enough time, and expertise is really what society rewards people for at the end of the day.
And going back to heritability, there’s definitely some heritability there
I would say that would be incredibly hard to empirically prove due to the problems you mentioned. At best we could speculate that heritability may be an influence, but that influence is vastly overshadowed by environmental factors.
This article does a pretty decent job pointing out some of the variabilities that make IQ test unreliable. Tbh I think the concept of IQ is fruit from the poisoned tree. There are so many people that stake their positions and identities on the efficacy of IQ that the whole data pool is kinda poisoned. For every study that makes a claim, there are other studies rebutting it.
And can you link me to the language thing? When I look up language, I’m just seeing correlation between language proficiency and IQ, which shouldn’t be surprising – I would imagine that people who measure a higher IQ are better at learning languages.
I would have to search for it, i originally read about it when I was in college over a decade ago. Basically the claim was that the vast majority of the tests originate or are interpreted from English or another western language. When certain aspects of the test are interpreted to a different language the sentence structure is modified in a way where it adds an additional barrier for the test taker.
This may be somewhat solved by the different language speakers creating their own test, but that may not overcome the problem due to the need for global standardization, orit may be a barrier to language speakers who’s cultures haven’t invested the time or resources to the idea of IQ to begin with.
I mean, the validity of IQ tests in general should be questioned when the largest variability in scoring is if you’ve previously studied for an IQ test followed by what language you speak.
Philosophically I don’t really think there’s a uniform agreement on what exactly defines general intellect, or if that general intellect even matters considering were a species that relies on specialization.
As far as heritability, I imagine that would be a horribly difficult topic to actually get enough research to rule out variables like socioeconomics and cultural differences. I mean I doubt there’s that many twin studies to establish the efficacy any particular theory.
Haha, no it’s good for me. English wasn’t my first language, so I welcome the reinforcement.
Surely attacking the musical embodiment of the working class in New Jersey will be good for the conservatives…right?
I feel like if he wanted Jersey to file articles of succession all he would have to do at this point is ban pork rolls.
Why don’t the homeless just simply befriend the children of oil tycoons and have them gift them a vineyard? Then they too could one day fail upwards to become the governor of California.
If Gavin wasn’t the friend of a billionaire he would be an illiterate moron who couldn’t hold down a job.
A perfect example of how terms like “woke” are indefinable.
The lady doth protest too much… I’m calling it now, some psychiatrist tried to diagnose Rfk Jr with autism and he lost his fucking shit about it. I mean the dudes been obsessed with dead animals since he was a child always been known as “eccentric”.
Buying the dip does not mean to purchase stock anytime number goes down. It means buy when you think something other than market forces are affecting a stock that you believe will make a quick recovery.
We are not in dip territory, we are in recession territory. An old saying is don’t try and catch a falling knife. It’s better to let it hit the floor before picking it back up, and we’re still a ways from hitting the floor.
Well, I mean he had an entire security detail deputized by the US Marshalls…so it’s not like he’s just walking out in the open. The guy surrounds himself with sycophants and other billionaires, it’s the only way to completely isolate yourself from reality.
I don’t think he’s really made an actual public appearance since being booed on stage at that chapel show, and that was by people going to see an unfunny transphobe.
Signal itself is not vulnerable. This article needs to correct itself. Signal is only vulnerable if the DEVICE THAT USES IT is compromised.
I think the description of vulnerability is subjective in this case. It could be that signal is inherently more vulnerable than official channels, as Signal is a private corporation that has no motivation to disclose any failures in their security.
I don’t think the article is trying to blame Signal in any way, it’s just not the proper communication channel and thus utilizing it is an inherent vulnerability no matter how secure their encryption may be.
Martin Luther King Jr and Malcom X knew that voting was not the only tool to fight oppression and were killed for it
Are you equating your criticisms to MLK and Malcolm X’s accomplishments?
been time to march to the white house again and has been for hot minute
And what exactly does your criticism have to do with marching on the fascist led white house?
Again my rebuttal to your criticism is that you didn’t offer anything but criticism to the only resistance option we currently have going for us. Criticism does not equal political organizing…
At the moment I would welcome any form of political organizing in the aims of opposing the current administration. Whether that be from Democrats, centrist Republicans , or even libertarians. I don’t care as long as you aren’t a fucking neonazi. We need a large tent opposition to oppose fascism as a popular front.
Leftist nitpicking liberal ideology only serves the aims of the fascist. Get over yourself and lock arms with anyone who is willing to stand up to a literal fascist.
naming it is enough if it is apparent that most are unaware.
Do you really think that people on Lemmy are unaware that the two party system is a problem?
I think the problem most people are having with this type of criticism is that it’s aimed at the only tool we currently have to oppose fascism, while not really giving us any other option. All while not even really being critical of the actual problem…the fascist.
The frustrating thing about my fellow leftist that most liberal minded on this site have, is that we seem to spend more time trying to fight liberalism than we do fascism. When history shows that the only real way to defeat fascist is to form a popular front with anyone who isn’t a fucking fascist.
Liberalism isn’t my preferred government choice, but I’ll make nice with anyone willing to throw hands at a fucking Nazi. We can settle our differences when the guys who want to exterminate minority groups have left the chat.
I mean you have valid points, but you’re not really offering much of a solution. I think most people will agree that the two party system has failed the people, but simply not participating in it is exactly what conservatives require to achieve their goals.
I am not a fan of hardly any Democrats, but it would be idiotic to say there’s not a stark difference between the two parties, especially at the State level.
Legality is a matter of judicial opinion and enforcement. It seems that the trump administration is perfectly fine with ignoring the former and the judicial system can’t be asked to perform the latter.
The banality of evil rears its unremarkable and familiar head once again.
It’s obviously a common definition of IQ… It doesn’t really matter where it’s from as it shows that general definitions of IQ claim it’s a test of generalized intellect.
Your quote doesn’t really refute my argument, or clarify what claim you are making?