22 ms·
To be scientific would require proving a definite causal relationship between IQ and intelligence, while also convincingly proving that intelligence can be meas
by otalp 8y ago
To be scientific would require proving a definite causal relationship between IQ and intelligence, while also convincingly proving that intelligence can be measured with a number
- feanaro 8y agoWhy does it have to be causal? A variable can be a real predictor of another without any of them causing the other one (for instance, they may have a common cause). That doesn't mean the predictor is of any less value. I would say that results on certain cognitive ability tests (i.e. "IQ tests") being at least a moderately good predictor for future performance in certain human activities is a rather well proven fact. For instance, the correlation between an IQ score and future job performance on a job with complex requirements is about 0.5. Of course, that does not mean the relationship is 1-to-1 and that it is a perfect predictor (which it obviously isn't).
- dragonwriter 8y ago> To be scientific would require proving a definite causal relationship between IQ and intelligence That's not how science works. A scientific theory includes a hypothesis with a causal explanation, but science doesn't deal in “definite causal relationships”, but in empirically useful models which only get viewed as approximating definite causal relations with age and lack of a better (simpler and/or with broader explanatory power) model being discovered.