6 ms·

Pretty cruel to ignore IQ and leave millions of mentally disadvantaged people in the lurch.

runarberg 7y ago
You’re not wrong. IQ (or more generally intelligence tests) are very useful to diagnose people with some mental disabilities. That said: a) the IQ part of the intelligence test is sort of unnecessary for that purpose, and b) That’s usually not what people are (righfully) criticizing IQ for and you know it.
- Retric 7y ago
  The difference between IQ at 20, 60, 100, 140, and 180 are all noticeable. However, the gaps become less impactful as you go up the scale. Simply because fewer activities are really impacted. Digging a ditch with a shovel for example is only so difficult.
  - MagnumOpus 7y ago
    > because fewer activities are really impacted ... Digging a ditch with a shovel Yes, and that is why over time this is becoming more important. To put out some arbitrary numbers, you can use a shovel with an IQ of 70, you can operate a backhoe with an IQ of 90, you can engineer the backhoe with an IQ of 120. Manual shoveling disappeared as an occupation 50 years ago apart from niches, driving as a profession might disappear in the next 15 -- and it does matter whether the people made unemployed by technology can be upskilled to be repairmen/engineers/programmers. If IQ is >50% genetic, they can't and you have to figure out how to deal with 10-20% of the population being permanently unemployed or employed in extremely-low-skilled jobs.
    - stonogo 7y ago
      > Manual shoveling disappeared as an occupation 50 years ago this is ... breathtakingly naive
    - runarberg 7y ago
      > you can engineer the backhoe with an IQ of 120 I think this requires rephrasing: The fact you _can_ engineer the backhoe, means you have a higher then average IQ. The fact you have the engineering degree and education required gives you a higher likelyhood of having an above average IQ. I’m sure you _can_ engineer a backhoe with an IQ of 90. But it is going to be harder for you to get the degree and education required. Whether it is harder because of some lack of some mental capabilities or because the whole education system is stacked against you because of your socio-economic status (which is predicted to be low given a lower then average IQ) is debatable.
  - runarberg 7y ago
    By IQ 20 you hardly have any mental capabilities at par with other humans, and you didn’t need the intelligence test to see that (and if you did, you didn’t need to summarize the IQ for the diagnosis). However if you go the same number of standard deviations up (~5.333) and get to 180 you don’t see any super human mental capabilities. In fact there is nothing really that distinguishes a 180 IQ from the average 100 IQ (except socio-economic factors like education, well paying job, rich educated parents, white or east asian heretige, etc.; and you didn’t need the IQ to tell you that). In short. IQ is never useful when you measure above the average, and only the test generating the IQ are useful when you get several standard deviations below the average.
    - Retric 7y ago
      That’s not well supported by the literature. 100 is not a magic number representing competence. 140 vs 100 is still relevant outside of socioeconomic factors. Among the illegal drug trade and other criminal activities IQ strongly correlates with success and positions even well past 100 IQ. The US military found increased IQ over 100 to strongly correlate with lower training costs. So initially flat out IQ tests and now an IQ proxy is still used to screen people before they can take jobs requiring significant training.
      - ohaideredevs 7y ago
        The ASVAB can be studied for and grinded, though, like the SAT, it would require more effort with a low IQ. Iirc the breadth is less than the SAT. Is there another test you are referring to in terms of this "IQ test proxy"? For fair disclosure, there was a study which showed that as IQ decreased, the span of time for a perfect IQ score prep increased almost infinitely, as the low IQ kids forgot the material they already learned. Maybe I will look for it later, would be very relevant here.
        Retric 7y ago
        You can actually prepare for specific IQ tests and thus inflate your score. Though presumably that's just gaming a test and has zero impact on IQ as measured by unrelated tests. However as this makes the tests less accurate it's discouraged.
sremani 7y ago
That is Taleb's argument -- the IQ can be used to measure "incompetence" not "comptence". An IQ less than say 85 means the inability of the individual and IQ of 140 does not mean that much. His basic argument is, after certain IQ when you look at their economic outcomes they are evenly distributed.
- reasonaway 7y ago
  the blog post shows this argument is false.
hestipod 7y ago
The parent clearly meant the sort of people who use it as some status symbol. Some posturing of worth.

You’re not wrong. IQ (or more generally intelligence tests) are very useful to diagnose people with some mental disabilities. That said: a) the IQ part of the intelligence test is sort of unnecessary for that purpose, and b) That’s usually not what people are (righfully) criticizing IQ for and you know it.

Retric 7y ago
The difference between IQ at 20, 60, 100, 140, and 180 are all noticeable. However, the gaps become less impactful as you go up the scale. Simply because fewer activities are really impacted. Digging a ditch with a shovel for example is only so difficult.
- MagnumOpus 7y ago
  > because fewer activities are really impacted ... Digging a ditch with a shovel Yes, and that is why over time this is becoming more important. To put out some arbitrary numbers, you can use a shovel with an IQ of 70, you can operate a backhoe with an IQ of 90, you can engineer the backhoe with an IQ of 120. Manual shoveling disappeared as an occupation 50 years ago apart from niches, driving as a profession might disappear in the next 15 -- and it does matter whether the people made unemployed by technology can be upskilled to be repairmen/engineers/programmers. If IQ is >50% genetic, they can't and you have to figure out how to deal with 10-20% of the population being permanently unemployed or employed in extremely-low-skilled jobs.
  - stonogo 7y ago
    > Manual shoveling disappeared as an occupation 50 years ago this is ... breathtakingly naive
  - runarberg 7y ago
    > you can engineer the backhoe with an IQ of 120 I think this requires rephrasing: The fact you _can_ engineer the backhoe, means you have a higher then average IQ. The fact you have the engineering degree and education required gives you a higher likelyhood of having an above average IQ. I’m sure you _can_ engineer a backhoe with an IQ of 90. But it is going to be harder for you to get the degree and education required. Whether it is harder because of some lack of some mental capabilities or because the whole education system is stacked against you because of your socio-economic status (which is predicted to be low given a lower then average IQ) is debatable.
- runarberg 7y ago
  By IQ 20 you hardly have any mental capabilities at par with other humans, and you didn’t need the intelligence test to see that (and if you did, you didn’t need to summarize the IQ for the diagnosis). However if you go the same number of standard deviations up (~5.333) and get to 180 you don’t see any super human mental capabilities. In fact there is nothing really that distinguishes a 180 IQ from the average 100 IQ (except socio-economic factors like education, well paying job, rich educated parents, white or east asian heretige, etc.; and you didn’t need the IQ to tell you that). In short. IQ is never useful when you measure above the average, and only the test generating the IQ are useful when you get several standard deviations below the average.
  - Retric 7y ago
    That’s not well supported by the literature. 100 is not a magic number representing competence. 140 vs 100 is still relevant outside of socioeconomic factors. Among the illegal drug trade and other criminal activities IQ strongly correlates with success and positions even well past 100 IQ. The US military found increased IQ over 100 to strongly correlate with lower training costs. So initially flat out IQ tests and now an IQ proxy is still used to screen people before they can take jobs requiring significant training.
    - ohaideredevs 7y ago
      The ASVAB can be studied for and grinded, though, like the SAT, it would require more effort with a low IQ. Iirc the breadth is less than the SAT. Is there another test you are referring to in terms of this "IQ test proxy"? For fair disclosure, there was a study which showed that as IQ decreased, the span of time for a perfect IQ score prep increased almost infinitely, as the low IQ kids forgot the material they already learned. Maybe I will look for it later, would be very relevant here.
      - Retric 7y ago
        You can actually prepare for specific IQ tests and thus inflate your score. Though presumably that's just gaming a test and has zero impact on IQ as measured by unrelated tests. However as this makes the tests less accurate it's discouraged.

sremani 7y ago

That is Taleb's argument -- the IQ can be used to measure "incompetence" not "comptence". An IQ less than say 85 means the inability of the individual and IQ of 140 does not mean that much. His basic argument is, after certain IQ when you look at their economic outcomes they are evenly distributed.

reasonaway 7y ago
the blog post shows this argument is false.

hestipod 7y ago

The parent clearly meant the sort of people who use it as some status symbol. Some posturing of worth.