3 ms·
Phrenology ideas were junk but that doesn’t mean that looking at people you learn nothing. For example, the brain size is 0.3-0.4 correlated to IQ.
by in3d 7y ago
Phrenology ideas were junk but that doesn’t mean that looking at people you learn nothing. For example, the brain size is 0.3-0.4 correlated to IQ.
- tsimionescu 7y agoAnd since IQ is an almost meaningless measure, so is brain size!
- asguy 7y agoMeaningless to whom? Do we have a better intelligence metric these days? ... or is this satire?
- jjeaff 7y agoMeaningless to everyone except for those that care about IQ.
- tsimionescu 7y agoThe fact that we don't have a good metric of intelligence doesn't make iq a useful measure of intelligence. IQ is only useful in determining pathologies, at the lower end, where any test is usually helpful. For anything else, it's almost entirely snake oil. If you want to know whether someone is good at something, the best way to test that is to do a test for that particular thing. A test for general inteligence, based on the assumption that general intelligence aptitude is normally distributed in the population, is just not good for anything, and is unlikely to be a reflection of reality, it's pure scientism (instead of science).
- uoaei 7y agoThere are certainly ways to glean information from people that is otherwise unavailable to a naive observer, like looking at how they walk and intuiting their motives. The issue is when others appropriate the language and rhetoric to serve their own selfish goals, e.g., eugenics.