This analysis doesn't engage very well with Taleb's key argument about symmetry. Distilling an R^2 ≈ 0.1 correlation from a massive dataset isn't very good evid

This analysis doesn't engage very well with Taleb's key argument about symmetry. Distilling an R^2 ≈ 0.1 correlation from a massive dataset isn't very good evidence of anything. But part of the blame rests with Taleb for arranging his arguments in a series of colloquial blog posts with exaggerated claims of both the relevance of this debate to psychology and unjustified speculation about what IQ actually measures — which would never survive peer review. He's invited low-quality debate like this rather than contributing to the development of standards and techniques that could improve the field, maybe out of laziness or just the desire for immediate publicity.