3 ms·
Two thoughts. Firstly if that's his point, his conclusion should match. Saying there is "no correlation" is a reach. Secondly, I'm not convinced I even believ
by alexandercrohde 6y ago
Two thoughts.
Firstly if that's his point, his conclusion should match. Saying there is "no correlation" is a reach.
Secondly, I'm not convinced I even believe that point. So is he saying that if I took an IQ test from nobel prize winners they would be equally distributed to a normal population sample (assuming a 100 minimum cutoff)?
- empath75 6y agoYes, in fact. http://nautil.us/issue/65/in-plain-sight/your-iq-matters-less-than-you-think http://nautil.us/issue/65/in-plain-sight/your-iq-matters-les...
- alexandercrohde 6y agoSorry, I don't want to read that whole thing. Is there a linked journal article about IQs of nobel winners?
- JamesBarney 6y agoThe article basically says when you look at a 1000 really smart 11 year olds you don't get any Nobel prize winners. Which is a pretty obvious straw man because the base rate of Nobel prize winners is 1 in a million, plus childhoold IQ doesn't perfectly correlate with adult IQ. For instance a group of children with an average IQ of 150 will have an average IQ of 130 as adults. https://pumpkinperson.com/2015/07/26/anne-roes-study-of-extremely-eminent-scientists/ https://pumpkinperson.com/2015/07/26/anne-roes-study-of-extr... Basically the average Nobel prize winners have IQ's in the 150's.
- empath75 6y agoThere were two future Nobel prize winners that were excluded from the group he studied because they didn't score high enough.
- JamesBarney 6y agoWho both also had very high iqs, just not quite high enough at the age of 11 to be included.