>Given that we cannot say what intelligence is better than "its what intelligent people do", I'd say we were far from the "whole story". I'm not opposed to thi

>Given that we cannot say what intelligence is better than "its what intelligent people do", I'd say we were far from the "whole story". I'm not opposed to this, and I doubt most people would be either. Take college admissions as an example. A low-SAT, low-GPA student in a one-on-one interview with an admissions officer could dazzle the interviewer to such a level that admission with a scholarship could be guaranteed. We don't do that often for a variety of reasons, but one would certainly be because of the quasi-legal requirement to tick certain boxes to avoid trouble. Okay, but that has costs. We've been able to paper over a lot of this with economic good times, but that's unlikely to last forever. Hard reality always wins in the end.