Thanks for the interesting read! It was a bit tiresome (a 38 page history lesson, followed by a 5 page introduction and only about 5 pages of actual content), b

Thanks for the interesting read! It was a bit tiresome (a 38 page history lesson, followed by a 5 page introduction and only about 5 pages of actual content), but very informative nonetheless. The proposed method is very hard to distinguish from a traditional IQ test (or a subset thereof) and the first to parts (~38 pages) basically serve as a justification for this. In the end the author admits that the proposed method lacks test diversity, has no established validity and has no way of qualifying results. The essay just stops where it gets interesting (i.e. at the point where the actual science starts), which left me a bit disappointed in the end t.b.h. It's a great summary of the history and development of the field and the methodologies used therein. It's in no way a solution to measuring and quantifying general intelligence, though.