3 ms·

Not only is IQ a poor measure that's perhaps best at capturing near average performance, "intelligence" is an attribute that's not readily ranked in a linear ma

Not only is IQ a poor measure that's perhaps best at capturing near average performance, "intelligence" is an attribute that's not readily ranked in a linear manner as height can be.

trts 2y ago
generally intelligent people tend to perform well on intelligence tests people who perform well on intelligence tests may not present as generally intelligent
JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> "intelligence" is an attribute that's not readily ranked in a linear manner as height can be IQ isn't a linear scale [1][2]. (It is ordinal.) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_quotient https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_quotient [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superposition_principle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superposition_principle
- defrost 2y ago
  Who said that it was?
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    > Who said that it was? You said "'intelligence' is an attribute that's not readily ranked in a linear manner" while complaining about IQ. IQ doesn't rank intelligence linearly.
    - defrost 2y ago
      I'll assume you understand the difference between a 1D line, a 2D plane, a 3D space and grasp basic english. What is your issue here?
      - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
        > I'll assume you understand the difference between a 1D line, a 2D plane IQ isn't linear because it is not superposable. A 100 IQ person isn't twice as clever, within the definition of cleverness IQ measures, as someone with a 50 IQ. (An 8' man is twice as tall as a 4' child.) If you need to force it into a geometric analogy, the distribution IQ rests on cannot be described by a line.
        defrost 2y ago
        > IQ isn't linear because it is not superposable. A 100 IQ person isn't twice as clever, within the definition of cleverness IQ measures, as someone with a 50 IQ. You appear to be thinking of a uniform distribution as compared to a normal distribution. Nominally both height and IQ approximate a normal distribution (sans the infinite tails, leaving aside discrete ordinal bucketing). "Linear" (see the O.E.D. for example) is a word with many meanings, mostly pertaining to lines and things resembling a line. You can line up people by height or by IQ score, you cannot line up people by "intelligence", it's a partial order at best. > the distribution IQ rests on cannot be described by a line. You're the only one of us that connected the scalar IQ distribution to a line .. I've been aware of the central limit theorem for 45+ years now. The geometric analogy is that mapping people by intelligence to a line is a poor fit, to a plane or higher space would make more sense. As evidenced by this exchange.
      - butter999 2y ago
        You probably meant that there doesn't exist a total order for comparing intelligence and/or that it isn't a scalar quantity like height, but "linear" didn't convey that meaning.
        defrost 2y ago
        Intelligence clearly isn't a scalar quantity like height, the implication is that a faux scalar quantity like IQ or other ordinal scale doesn't well describe intelligence.
        2y ago

Not only is IQ a poor measure that's perhaps best at capturing near average performance, "intelligence" is an attribute that's not readily ranked in a linear manner as height can be.

trts 2y ago

generally intelligent people tend to perform well on intelligence tests people who perform well on intelligence tests may not present as generally intelligent

JumpCrisscross 2y ago

> "intelligence" is an attribute that's not readily ranked in a linear manner as height can be IQ isn't a linear scale [1][2]. (It is ordinal.) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_quotient https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_quotient [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superposition_principle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superposition_principle

defrost 2y ago
Who said that it was?
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > Who said that it was? You said "'intelligence' is an attribute that's not readily ranked in a linear manner" while complaining about IQ. IQ doesn't rank intelligence linearly.
  - defrost 2y ago
    I'll assume you understand the difference between a 1D line, a 2D plane, a 3D space and grasp basic english. What is your issue here?
    - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
      > I'll assume you understand the difference between a 1D line, a 2D plane IQ isn't linear because it is not superposable. A 100 IQ person isn't twice as clever, within the definition of cleverness IQ measures, as someone with a 50 IQ. (An 8' man is twice as tall as a 4' child.) If you need to force it into a geometric analogy, the distribution IQ rests on cannot be described by a line.
      - defrost 2y ago
        > IQ isn't linear because it is not superposable. A 100 IQ person isn't twice as clever, within the definition of cleverness IQ measures, as someone with a 50 IQ. You appear to be thinking of a uniform distribution as compared to a normal distribution. Nominally both height and IQ approximate a normal distribution (sans the infinite tails, leaving aside discrete ordinal bucketing). "Linear" (see the O.E.D. for example) is a word with many meanings, mostly pertaining to lines and things resembling a line. You can line up people by height or by IQ score, you cannot line up people by "intelligence", it's a partial order at best. > the distribution IQ rests on cannot be described by a line. You're the only one of us that connected the scalar IQ distribution to a line .. I've been aware of the central limit theorem for 45+ years now. The geometric analogy is that mapping people by intelligence to a line is a poor fit, to a plane or higher space would make more sense. As evidenced by this exchange.
    - butter999 2y ago
      You probably meant that there doesn't exist a total order for comparing intelligence and/or that it isn't a scalar quantity like height, but "linear" didn't convey that meaning.
      - defrost 2y ago
        Intelligence clearly isn't a scalar quantity like height, the implication is that a faux scalar quantity like IQ or other ordinal scale doesn't well describe intelligence.
        2y ago