7 ms·
It's not entirely clear what precisely IQ is measuring. It's not a stretch that averaging the output of a bunch of 100 IQ people yields something better than wh
by dTal 4y ago
It's not entirely clear what precisely IQ is measuring. It's not a stretch that averaging the output of a bunch of 100 IQ people yields something better than what any one of them could have produced. Perhaps "there's only one way to be right, but many ways to be wrong".
- prettyStandard 4y agoWe know what IQ is. It's the ability to think abstractly. Even more precisely it's the ability to do IQ tests.
- QuiDortDine 4y agoThis is a common belief that used to be true, but no longer is. IQ tests are reasonably good at measuring general intelligence, ie the g factor : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G_factor_(psychometrics) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G_factor_(psychometrics)
- prettyStandard 4y agoI'm glad you posted this. Sometimes I try to describe this gfactor to people, saying "the best indicator of intelligence is any other intelligence". Putting a name on things helps people understand I am not a total bullshiter. Why do you say that this is a common belief that used to be true, but is now no longer true?