5 ms·

> Here is the hard thing to swallow: Some people are worth more than others. According to whom? Why do they have the authority to say? You can say that perso

> Here is the hard thing to swallow: Some people are worth more than others. According to whom? Why do they have the authority to say? You can say that person A produces more economic output than person B, but the true worth of that is subjective. Higher IQ doesn't necessarily mean you're more competent, it means you're better at solving certain kinds of puzzles. Unless it is your job to solve that kind of puzzle you should directly measure what you care about. I also don't see how a preference for high IQ scores is inextricably linked to the notion of progress.

stcredzero 8y ago
I also don't see how a preference for high IQ scores is inextricably linked to the notion of progress. It is the one measurable attribute which is most strongly associated with positive life outcomes, flat out. There are also different kinds of intelligence. This is really just to say that there are different kinds of competence. The more competent people are at solving problems, fixing things, and getting along with each other, the better life is. That's all it is.
bloak 8y ago
It seems to me that people today are mostly rewarded for passing exams, not "IQ" tests. Being good at passing exams is different from being good at "IQ" tests, and neither of those things necessarily correlates well with being good at doing useful work. Provided that the candidates have had similar educational opportunities, I would guess that a traditional exam is a better measure of someone's ability to be good at useful work because preparing for an exam requires studying, which is a kind of work. On the other hand, if you have to compare candidates who have not had similar educational opportunities, something similar to an "IQ" test might be better, though you will end up selecting some people who turn out to be good at very little besides solving those kinds of puzzles, and who are perhaps lazy and disorganised to boot.

stcredzero 8y ago

I also don't see how a preference for high IQ scores is inextricably linked to the notion of progress. It is the one measurable attribute which is most strongly associated with positive life outcomes, flat out. There are also different kinds of intelligence. This is really just to say that there are different kinds of competence. The more competent people are at solving problems, fixing things, and getting along with each other, the better life is. That's all it is.

bloak 8y ago

It seems to me that people today are mostly rewarded for passing exams, not "IQ" tests. Being good at passing exams is different from being good at "IQ" tests, and neither of those things necessarily correlates well with being good at doing useful work. Provided that the candidates have had similar educational opportunities, I would guess that a traditional exam is a better measure of someone's ability to be good at useful work because preparing for an exam requires studying, which is a kind of work. On the other hand, if you have to compare candidates who have not had similar educational opportunities, something similar to an "IQ" test might be better, though you will end up selecting some people who turn out to be good at very little besides solving those kinds of puzzles, and who are perhaps lazy and disorganised to boot.