3 ms·
You have bought into a logical fallacy - a common one pushed by the many people who have agendas for whatever reason to dismiss IQ (and thereby all psychometric
by clove 5y ago
You have bought into a logical fallacy - a common one pushed by the many people who have agendas for whatever reason to dismiss IQ (and thereby all psychometrics, in practice). If you are really interested in understanding IQ, which is not a question of being "real" but a metric created to measure the g-factor, you can educate yourself via unbiased sources in the field of Intelligence. Just to contribute a bit to your education, though, let me point out that the examples of "debunking" you have listed confuse within-individual differences over time with between-individual differences, the latter having been shown to be extremely stable.
- Apocryphon 5y agoOn that note, there was an interesting comment on psychometrics here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29798887 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29798887
- olliej 5y agoI’m unsure how to respond to this - I explicitly did not dismiss iq, but the testing. If the testing has any bias then the results of the testing are not comparable between people. The net effect of this is that any system that has attempted to make “unbiased” choices based on IQ tests as an objective measure have resulted in systems that favour those biases. I don’t deny that people have an “IQ”, “g-factor”, “ISDN”, or whatever. It is very clear that some people are smarter than others[1]. But the biased testing renders is useless for any outside of an individual. [1] to be very clear, I’ve known plenty of otherwise “smart” people who have performed poorly, and vice versa. Generally results in life aren’t purely a result of anything innate.