6 ms·

My hot take is that people who believe in IQ have low IQ.

JamesBarney 4y ago
What does it mean to not believe in IQ? Does that mean these high IQ people don't think IQ exists. It obviously exists. It's a real measure that people use. It's not like midichlorian count which is a measure from Starwars. Which doesn't exist because it only exists in the movies and doesn't measure something real (the force).
- altruios 4y ago
  I would say (it has been a while), the common complaint that I've heard is the tests for IQ are not standardized - there are a million snake-oil pitches for free and paid online IQ tests - or that the real tests have a bunch of cultural bias that might skew the results... Or that IQ is inadequate as a measure of general intelligence (if IQ measures pattern matching effectively and it misses other kinds of reasoning entirely)... lots of complaints I've heard - can't say one way or the other if there is any salt to them. I haven't heard the complaint before that IQ is imaginary, that's a new one... I think through reading the exchange I see where the semantics shifted between people's thoughts, I doubt that's what the the poster above you meant - likely they meant a combination of the many complaints to dismiss the general usefulness of IQ tests as a predictor of intelligence.
  - solveit 4y ago
    That sounds like a complaint that online IQ tests are bad, which is obviously correct but also not really relevant to IQ as studied in psychometrics. The complaints I hear about IQ are completely opposite! People dislike standardized exams, including IQ tests, because of their standardization! That is, the need to assess everyone the same way precludes assessment specific to the individual being assessed. Detractors of IQ, insofar as they would like assessment at all, would prefer a more holistic procedure where the characteristics and capabilities of the assessee are analysed with due attention paid to the specific life history of said assessee.
  - colinmhayes 4y ago
    There are certainly a lot of valid complaints about IQ. The lack of standardization is obviously a problem, and the cultural understanding of it is severely lacking. But study after study have shown that IQ is highly correlated with financial success, and at this point the confounders have been controlled well enough to say it’s hard for me to deny that pattern recognition, which is what well made iq tests measure, is a cause of success.
    - hirvi74 4y ago
      I am not sure what is defined as "financial success," since it appears to be something one can be born into regardless of IQ. In regards to income, I briefly skimmed the Wikipedia section for IQ and Income, which can be found here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_quotient#Income https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_quotient#Income "Highly correlated" would not be the choice of words I use to describe correlations between (0.23 - 0.5). We, as people, should cherish the contributions of one's intelligence instead of obsessing over an arbitrary, qualitative value painted as a qualitative value like one's potential intelligence.
      - marketerinland 4y ago
        Maybe you’re not familiar with how correlation is reported, but 0.23-0.5 is very high.
        hirvi74 4y ago
        I think I am hung up on semantics. If 0.23-0.5 correlation is "very high" then what is 0.7-0.9? Would r >= 0.7 be literal causation at that point for psychologist? (I'm kidding, of course) Again, I am not saying that a correlation of 0.23-0.5 is statistically insignificant by any means. I just think I needed "very high" to be coupled with "for psychology."
      - political12345 4y ago
        > Highly correlated" would not be the choice of words I use to describe correlations between (0.23 - 0.5). lol, this range is 0.5 to 0.7 variance explained (R squared) which is an insane value. in typical social studies a correlation of > 5% is considered a major improvement. In finance a correlation or > 1% is considered amazing. You are either a hyper-intelectual drinking Taleb's kool-aid or simply don't know what you are talking about :D
- oreally 4y ago
  IQ is an indicator of how fast one learns at the job/skill, not how long they stick in it. This is something social psychologists have authority in and not the opinions of techbros.
- autoexec 4y ago
  > What does it mean to not believe in IQ? I believe that IQ exists, but I don't believe it's an effective measure of the things people typically expect from it once you get into average or above average scores. Leaving aside the problem of the tests themselves and how they're conducted, I suspect that even a "perfect" test wouldn't predict how well a person would manage their life, perform in their job, or contribute positively to society. At the low end, IQ testing can identify individuals with problems that will certainly cause them difficulties, but a person with a high IQ won't necessarily outperform someone with an average IQ in tasks that aren't IQ tests.
  - j0hnyl 4y ago
    I think you are making assumptions here: > effective measure of the things people typically expect from it once you get into average or above average scores. But I don't think that's what IQ is, it's just a measure of a type of assessment relative to other participants. Beyond that, there are strong correlations at various IQ levels on how people perceive certain spatial and logic questions/tasks. IQ does not measure your personality or job performance.
SamPatt 4y ago
Some people are better problem solvers than others. IQ is an attempt at measuring this. Why is this (admittedly imperfect) method so foolish?

What does it mean to not believe in IQ? Does that mean these high IQ people don't think IQ exists. It obviously exists. It's a real measure that people use. It's not like midichlorian count which is a measure from Starwars. Which doesn't exist because it only exists in the movies and doesn't measure something real (the force).

altruios 4y ago
I would say (it has been a while), the common complaint that I've heard is the tests for IQ are not standardized - there are a million snake-oil pitches for free and paid online IQ tests - or that the real tests have a bunch of cultural bias that might skew the results... Or that IQ is inadequate as a measure of general intelligence (if IQ measures pattern matching effectively and it misses other kinds of reasoning entirely)... lots of complaints I've heard - can't say one way or the other if there is any salt to them. I haven't heard the complaint before that IQ is imaginary, that's a new one... I think through reading the exchange I see where the semantics shifted between people's thoughts, I doubt that's what the the poster above you meant - likely they meant a combination of the many complaints to dismiss the general usefulness of IQ tests as a predictor of intelligence.
- solveit 4y ago
  That sounds like a complaint that online IQ tests are bad, which is obviously correct but also not really relevant to IQ as studied in psychometrics. The complaints I hear about IQ are completely opposite! People dislike standardized exams, including IQ tests, because of their standardization! That is, the need to assess everyone the same way precludes assessment specific to the individual being assessed. Detractors of IQ, insofar as they would like assessment at all, would prefer a more holistic procedure where the characteristics and capabilities of the assessee are analysed with due attention paid to the specific life history of said assessee.
- colinmhayes 4y ago
  There are certainly a lot of valid complaints about IQ. The lack of standardization is obviously a problem, and the cultural understanding of it is severely lacking. But study after study have shown that IQ is highly correlated with financial success, and at this point the confounders have been controlled well enough to say it’s hard for me to deny that pattern recognition, which is what well made iq tests measure, is a cause of success.
  - hirvi74 4y ago
    I am not sure what is defined as "financial success," since it appears to be something one can be born into regardless of IQ. In regards to income, I briefly skimmed the Wikipedia section for IQ and Income, which can be found here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_quotient#Income https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_quotient#Income "Highly correlated" would not be the choice of words I use to describe correlations between (0.23 - 0.5). We, as people, should cherish the contributions of one's intelligence instead of obsessing over an arbitrary, qualitative value painted as a qualitative value like one's potential intelligence.
    - marketerinland 4y ago
      Maybe you’re not familiar with how correlation is reported, but 0.23-0.5 is very high.
      - hirvi74 4y ago
        I think I am hung up on semantics. If 0.23-0.5 correlation is "very high" then what is 0.7-0.9? Would r >= 0.7 be literal causation at that point for psychologist? (I'm kidding, of course) Again, I am not saying that a correlation of 0.23-0.5 is statistically insignificant by any means. I just think I needed "very high" to be coupled with "for psychology."
    - political12345 4y ago
      > Highly correlated" would not be the choice of words I use to describe correlations between (0.23 - 0.5). lol, this range is 0.5 to 0.7 variance explained (R squared) which is an insane value. in typical social studies a correlation of > 5% is considered a major improvement. In finance a correlation or > 1% is considered amazing. You are either a hyper-intelectual drinking Taleb's kool-aid or simply don't know what you are talking about :D
oreally 4y ago
IQ is an indicator of how fast one learns at the job/skill, not how long they stick in it. This is something social psychologists have authority in and not the opinions of techbros.
autoexec 4y ago
> What does it mean to not believe in IQ? I believe that IQ exists, but I don't believe it's an effective measure of the things people typically expect from it once you get into average or above average scores. Leaving aside the problem of the tests themselves and how they're conducted, I suspect that even a "perfect" test wouldn't predict how well a person would manage their life, perform in their job, or contribute positively to society. At the low end, IQ testing can identify individuals with problems that will certainly cause them difficulties, but a person with a high IQ won't necessarily outperform someone with an average IQ in tasks that aren't IQ tests.
- j0hnyl 4y ago
  I think you are making assumptions here: > effective measure of the things people typically expect from it once you get into average or above average scores. But I don't think that's what IQ is, it's just a measure of a type of assessment relative to other participants. Beyond that, there are strong correlations at various IQ levels on how people perceive certain spatial and logic questions/tasks. IQ does not measure your personality or job performance.

SamPatt 4y ago

Some people are better problem solvers than others. IQ is an attempt at measuring this. Why is this (admittedly imperfect) method so foolish?