Iq is a course and imperfect metric, but it is a decent proxy or general intelligence.
Pick almost any measures that you think Define general intelligence and you will see stark differences between a group at 80 iq and 120.
Pick almost any measures that you think Define general intelligence and you will see stark differences between a group at 80 iq and 120.
The tests, like the IQ, can flag potential problems that have gone over looked, but beyond that it doesn’t matter if someone runs a 4.3, 4.4, or 4.5 40.
IQ is unscientific nonsense from the 60s that that been overstudied for cultural reasons.
Any time you read it in an article you can substitute it for "socioeconomic reasons". Which is just as unclear but at least it is less of a smokescreen to cast doubt on causality.
[1]https://www.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/oh6115/perf...
No one disputes that IQ works, that is not the claim, just as the even more nebulous term "socioeconomic factors" works across wide field s of study. But it is not the best predictor we have.
Not sure what types of propaganda you see in this, or who stands to gain from it. If any, it should be those heavily invested in questionable theories, perhaps even making money from peddling books and courses.
If you really want to argue that IQ is a scientific measurement, start by explaining the scientific process that arrived at the particular method that is broadly used to measure it. Then, if you really want to convince someone, explain what the feedback process looks like that guides the continuing work to improve the measurement process. Because surely there is one, unless you want to argue that IQ is a perfect predictor that could never be improved?
Many things from 60s psychology were quite extraordinary, and as the saying goes extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Efforts to reproduce these studies have had limited success, to say the least.
Are you claiming that social economic status is a better predictor of spatial Imaging and logic than a direct test of an individual in question?
I am very curious to see those mappings. Can you point to some? I am especially unsure about what said «measures» can be, and if/which theories about them are developed.
In other words, most measures you might come up with are likely to be strongly correlated with IQ.
Personnel selection research provides much evidence that intelligence (g) is an important predictor of performance in training and on the job, especially in higher level work. This article provides evidence that g has pervasive utility in work settings because it is essen- tially the ability to deal with cognitive complexity, in particular, with complex information processing. The more complex a work task, the greater the advantages that higher g confers in performing it well. Everyday tasks, like job duties, also differ in their level of complexity. The importance of intelligence therefore differs systematically across differ- ent arenas of social life as well as economic endeavor. Data from the National Adult Literacy Survey are used to show how higher levels of cognitive ability systematically improve individuals’ odds of dealing successfully with the ordinary demands of modem life (such as banking, using maps and transportation schedules, reading and understanding forms, interpreting news articles). These and other data are summarized to illustrate how the advantages of higher g, even when they are small, cumulate to affect the overall life chances of individuals at different ranges of the IQ bell curve. The article concludes by suggesting ways to reduce the risks for low-IQ individuals of being left behind by an increasingly complex postindustrial economy.
https://www1.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/reprints/1997whygmatt...
These people Have difficulty with everyday demands like using a phone or address book. May not be able to learn to read bus or train schedules, bank, fill out forms, or use household appliances like a video recorder, microwave oven, or computer. They therefore require assistance from relatives or social workers in the management of their affairs. They can be employed in simple tasks but require supervision.
This is not a matter of effort or exposure. Even with training these people may not be able to acquire these skills over decades.
People with higher IQs simply do not have these challenges to the same degree.