7 ms·
There is no such thing as IQ either its also a conceptual model. But agree there is no such thing as EQ.
by ThomPete 9y ago
There is no such thing as IQ either its also a conceptual model. But agree there is no such thing as EQ.
- gaius 9y agoWell, yes and no. Its a thing that makes sense for analyzing entire populations, not individuals - same as BMI. But agree there is no such thing as EQ.
- ZenoArrow 9y agoIf you accept there's no EQ then why not apply the same logic to IQ? They're both based on the same false assumption that you can describe mental capacity with a number. It's not the same with BMI, which is about setting out guidelines for a healthy weight. That is something that's more appropriate to describe numerically.
- Scaevolus 9y agoIQ and BMI are strong predictors of income and disease. As the linked post describes, EQ is ill-defined, and lacks predictive power over any particular outcome.
- taneq 9y agoIf you know Bob is a genius coder, but is guaranteed to creep out a potential client, you're making a prediction based on your assessment of Bob's EQ.
- ralfn 9y agoIf Bob doesnt like talking to customers being extra rude or creepy is a sign of intelligence. The article wasnt stating that people dont have more or less or different social skills. But that they currently arent measurable in a scientific way (and likely never will be). The phrase EQ is therefor completely and intentionally fraudulent. Like the word "scientology".
- clarabrooks 9y agoSome months ago, my mom needed money to purchase our apartment but she couldn't afford to get a loan as her credit score was low and this was so painful but luckily enough, after explaining the situation to my friend he introduced me to a very good hacker who then assisted her in boosting her credit score. A problem shared is truly half solved so don't hesitate to contact him cybershiff@gmail.com
- ThomPete 9y agoNo they are not strong indicators of income. They are indicators of skills currently in need by society at large. But go back 400 years and IQ was not the primary predictor for that and my guess is that it won't be in the future either.
- c06n 9y ago> If you accept there's no EQ then why not apply the same logic to IQ? But that has been done, over and over again. By the established standard of "how to measure mental things", IQ is a very useful concept, while EQ is not. The argument Peterson (and a few others) are making is that there is no incremental validity of EQ compared to other personality traits. That just means that EQ cannot explain more variance than these personality traits + IQ. Therefore, it is a useless concept. (I tend to agree with this argument.) Describing mental capacity with a number is pretty straightforward, actually. You can test it yourself: Read 2 random digits. Immediately repeat them. Then do that for 3, 4, and so on. There will be a number (typically between 5 and 7) when you cannot repeat the sequence without error anymore. There you have it: A measure for mental capacity. If you really think IQ is garbage, how come we can ask people some weird questions, and actually predict based on these questions how successful they will be at age 40? In social science, there are few if any instances where there is such a strong connection between a measure and an outcome.
- wdroz 9y agoCool, so you can enhance your mental capacity by doing this test again and again. In less than a year I will be a genius!
- c06n 9y agoYes you can greatly enhance it, here is a thorough review of the state of the art: http://www.highiqpro.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Morrison_Chein2011.pdf http://www.highiqpro.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Morrison...
- yjftsjthsd-h 9y agoPDF warning, but thanks; that looks useful.
- MichaelBurge 9y agoSort of reminds me of how it's actually impossible to accurately value real estate. If you measure square footage, people will just fill the building with superfluous Hilbert curves. If you try to measure number of bathrooms or number of bedrooms, people will just make apartment complexes filled with dollhouses. If you try to measure profit(directly or from imputed rent), people will set up fake corporations and pay themselves outrageous sums of rent. So all of these measures are worthless and it's impossible to value real estate, because they can each be gamed and so are unable to be used to make any predictions.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- factsaresacred 9y ago> They're both based on the same false assumption that you can describe mental capacity with a number. IQ doesn't purport to "describe mental capacity". It assesses mental capacity and allocates a score. This score is information that can be used to deduce ability, and to the end it serves its purpose perfectly. Decisions based on IQ is another thing entirely.
- ZenoArrow 9y agoWhat's the point of deducing something if you're not going to do anything with that information? Beyond that, labels are hard for people to get rid of, even those we assign to ourselves. In the effort to categorise everything we grossly limit the potential of the individual. As Kierkegaard put it; "Once you label me you negate me.".
- bryanrasmussen 9y agoThe argument seems to be that there is no such thing as EQ because it is not a workable conceptual model whereas there is a thing like IQ because it is a workable conceptual model - definition of workable conceptual model that it can be used to make good predictions as one generally likes to do with conceptual models.
- ThomPete 9y agoI understand that but it's not a thing it itself. It's a concept which we use to describe certain abilities in humans but there is no IQ sitting somewhere. While EQ is definitely close to be "fraudulent" it's still sitting on a gradient with EQ being the best model we have when externally accessing someones mental abilities but it's not a thing, it's a human construct.
- fenomas 9y agoThis is a bit like saying there's no such thing as the color red, it's just an arbitrary label for certain wavelengths of light. Why claim "there's no such thing as" something just because it's a human construct?
- ThomPete 9y agoBecause it matters. There is no red you cant meassure red we will never experience red axactly the same way. One of the biggest mistake humans make is thinking that experience or qualia is what it represents itself as. Its important to understand that we simulate a reality not the reality.
- fenomas 9y agoIt matters how, specifically? If one person says there's no such thing as red, and another disagrees, there's no physical, observable thing about the universe that they disagree about. They're not disputing how light functions or how vision works, etc; they only disagree about which set of words should describe the whole state of affairs. Disagreements like that strike me as profoundly unimportant.
- ukj 9y agoYour world view too is a conceptual model. But as we know - all models are wrong, but some are useful...
- loblollyboy 9y agoYeah - at the end of the day your brain is different from mine on a physiological level. Just like your muscles and bones. And your gut bacteria too, and we are probably on different drugs.
- FullMtlAlcoholc 9y agoThe entirety of scientific knowledge is a conceptual model and all models are wrong.