4 ms·
I find the unwillingness to accept that general intelligence could be measurable (especially at the macro level) similarly perplexing.
by moduspol 8y ago
I find the unwillingness to accept that general intelligence could be measurable (especially at the macro level) similarly perplexing.
- smolder 8y agoIt's definitely useful but with caveats. Your measurable iq isn't constant, people can have impairments that lower it temporarily and there are also certain drugs that can raise test scores.
- chosenbreed 8y ago> It's definitely useful but with caveats. Your measurable iq isn't constant, people can have impairments that lower it temporarily and there are also certain drugs that can raise test scores. What!? Where can I get a hold of those drugs? :-)
- smolder 8y agoI don't recommend naively swallowing pill cocktails in pursuit of IQ test scores, but informally people have taken stimulants and anti-narcolepsy drugs and gotten better scores, doing a reasonable job controlling for other factors.
- arethuza 8y agoActually, I have no problem with measuring it - just that the idea of commonly representing it as a single value that I'm a bit sceptical about.
- moduspol 8y agoIt's typically referred to as "general intelligence," or "g," and the reason this single value is significant is because of the strong correlations it has with other life outcomes. I don't think anyone claims it represents all intelligence, and presumably we could come up for numbers regarding other aspects of intelligence. It's just the best number we've got so far for what people are trying to measure.