4 ms·

Group level differences in IQ and its components are measurable. As someone not remotely progressive and who simply does not care about their values, I don’t b

Group level differences in IQ and its components are measurable. As someone not remotely progressive and who simply does not care about their values, I don’t believe any of these things actually amount to a workable definition of intelligence. I base this on my experiences with the very well-sifted meritocrats I encounter daily.

screye 5y ago
Unfortunately again, IQ is highly predictive. It obviously clashes with the massive emphasis on merit, grit & educational attainment placed by western liberal ideology. It fundamentally shakes the very foundation of outcome based evaluation of one's protestant/puritanism, especially in American Academia. (the deeply rooted nature of protestantism in the pro-science / anti-religion/ Academic community in the US is long discussion I would love to have at some point. I want to be clear that I do not mean it in a derogatory manner. It is an observation. Not a value judgement) Imagine if grit, intelligence and productivity within a capitalistic system were highly predictable at birth. Then the claim to eliteness that lends these elite institutions power, will suddenly get the appearance of genetic superiority. It quickly starts sounding like old school eugenicists. They/We will become what they claim to hate. Intelligence is an easier discussion in the east. The floor for the value you bring to society is not based on your intelligence alone. They also don't hide the brutal realities for survival/thriving in a society where you might lack vital skills from birth. I think everyone on HN would agree that a feudal-class system determined at birth, is not a desirable outcome. As it stands now, ignoring the ground realities has led to us building exactly that. The tabooing of IQ does not serve to stop the creation of this dystopia. It serves to obscure the reality that we might already be living in it. Razib Khan [1] writes a lot about intelligence from a genetic standpoint (He works in population genomics). One quote of interest General intelligence is one of the most predictive psychological measures in existence. The chestnut of wisdom that ability to test well measures how well you take a test is true but trivial. The implication that test measurement does not correlate with other aspects of performance is manifestly false. Those with higher measured IQs have higher incomes, greater educational attainment, and lower crime rates (this remains true among siblings who differ in IQ). This is well known within psychological science, but for various reasons has been obscured and downplayed by broader American culture. As with the athletically gifted, the differences in outcomes is most obvious in those who are intellectually gifted at a young age. The chart below shows the outcomes of 259 children identified as very gifted in their early teens on the SAT: One out of thirteen of these extremely bright children became tenured professors. One out of thirty-three wrote a book. Nearly half obtained doctorates. These are not average kids who simply “test well.” There is luck in life, but the die is loaded. Very high intelligence is no guarantee of exceptional achievement, but it clearly changes the probabilities. [1] https://razib.substack.com/p/applying-iq-to-iq https://razib.substack.com/p/applying-iq-to-iq [2] https://cdn.substack.com/image/fetch/w_1456,c_limit,f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fbucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F36724bb1-64dc-4c88-8a81-5e99dbdb4f32_871x457.png https://cdn.substack.com/image/fetch/w_1456,c_limit,f_auto,q...
- huetius 5y ago
  The people I speak of have high incomes, high education levels, don’t break the law, can solve logic puzzles very fast, etc. They are also extremely stupid.
  - marcellus23 5y ago
    The fact that you personally happen to know some people who are successful despite being "stupid" (whatever that means according to you), is not really any sort of convincing point. And at any rate, the fact that a "stupid" person _can_ be successful certainly says nothing about how likely to be successful any given "stupid" person is.
    - huetius 5y ago
      I invite you to consult your own experience. High IQ people are often more skilled than others in explaining away gulfs between their understanding and encounters with reality. For IQ believers, such people still get to be called intelligent. For me, it makes them stupid.
      - watson_truth 5y ago
        You're quibbling about the definitions. Sure, high IQ people can be irrational and believe stupid stuff. Doesn't change the fact that IQ is important for success in modern society.
- gremloni 5y ago
  It comes back to the idea that intelligence comes back to performing well in our current narrow paradigm with all its rules and constraints. It could be very differently defined for instance in a world where the fundamental rules are different.
  - watson_truth 5y ago
    Yes, IQ is important for tasks related to complex civilizations. There is a reason Africans don't have those.

screye 5y ago

Unfortunately again, IQ is highly predictive. It obviously clashes with the massive emphasis on merit, grit & educational attainment placed by western liberal ideology. It fundamentally shakes the very foundation of outcome based evaluation of one's protestant/puritanism, especially in American Academia. (the deeply rooted nature of protestantism in the pro-science / anti-religion/ Academic community in the US is long discussion I would love to have at some point. I want to be clear that I do not mean it in a derogatory manner. It is an observation. Not a value judgement) Imagine if grit, intelligence and productivity within a capitalistic system were highly predictable at birth. Then the claim to eliteness that lends these elite institutions power, will suddenly get the appearance of genetic superiority. It quickly starts sounding like old school eugenicists. They/We will become what they claim to hate. Intelligence is an easier discussion in the east. The floor for the value you bring to society is not based on your intelligence alone. They also don't hide the brutal realities for survival/thriving in a society where you might lack vital skills from birth. I think everyone on HN would agree that a feudal-class system determined at birth, is not a desirable outcome. As it stands now, ignoring the ground realities has led to us building exactly that. The tabooing of IQ does not serve to stop the creation of this dystopia. It serves to obscure the reality that we might already be living in it. Razib Khan [1] writes a lot about intelligence from a genetic standpoint (He works in population genomics). One quote of interest General intelligence is one of the most predictive psychological measures in existence. The chestnut of wisdom that ability to test well measures how well you take a test is true but trivial. The implication that test measurement does not correlate with other aspects of performance is manifestly false. Those with higher measured IQs have higher incomes, greater educational attainment, and lower crime rates (this remains true among siblings who differ in IQ). This is well known within psychological science, but for various reasons has been obscured and downplayed by broader American culture. As with the athletically gifted, the differences in outcomes is most obvious in those who are intellectually gifted at a young age. The chart below shows the outcomes of 259 children identified as very gifted in their early teens on the SAT: One out of thirteen of these extremely bright children became tenured professors. One out of thirty-three wrote a book. Nearly half obtained doctorates. These are not average kids who simply “test well.” There is luck in life, but the die is loaded. Very high intelligence is no guarantee of exceptional achievement, but it clearly changes the probabilities. [1] https://razib.substack.com/p/applying-iq-to-iq https://razib.substack.com/p/applying-iq-to-iq [2] https://cdn.substack.com/image/fetch/w_1456,c_limit,f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fbucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F36724bb1-64dc-4c88-8a81-5e99dbdb4f32_871x457.png https://cdn.substack.com/image/fetch/w_1456,c_limit,f_auto,q...

huetius 5y ago
The people I speak of have high incomes, high education levels, don’t break the law, can solve logic puzzles very fast, etc. They are also extremely stupid.
- marcellus23 5y ago
  The fact that you personally happen to know some people who are successful despite being "stupid" (whatever that means according to you), is not really any sort of convincing point. And at any rate, the fact that a "stupid" person _can_ be successful certainly says nothing about how likely to be successful any given "stupid" person is.
  - huetius 5y ago
    I invite you to consult your own experience. High IQ people are often more skilled than others in explaining away gulfs between their understanding and encounters with reality. For IQ believers, such people still get to be called intelligent. For me, it makes them stupid.
    - watson_truth 5y ago
      You're quibbling about the definitions. Sure, high IQ people can be irrational and believe stupid stuff. Doesn't change the fact that IQ is important for success in modern society.
gremloni 5y ago
It comes back to the idea that intelligence comes back to performing well in our current narrow paradigm with all its rules and constraints. It could be very differently defined for instance in a world where the fundamental rules are different.
- watson_truth 5y ago
  Yes, IQ is important for tasks related to complex civilizations. There is a reason Africans don't have those.