> Taking the fuzziest, least precise view of what "more intelligent" or "less intelligent" means, I think yes. No argument there. > In general a single "IQ"

> Taking the fuzziest, least precise view of what "more intelligent" or "less intelligent" means, I think yes. No argument there. > In general a single "IQ" figure is merely a statistical index of the subtests. Which is why I point out that any weighing between subtests are relatively problematic in generating that number. > The sub-category indices are much more revealing. 100% agreed there. > The closest we can come is to compare the test scores statistically to other outcomes, or to other tests. But the problem is, the ability to accurately sample these components may not be the same for each component. For example, if you want to measure coordination of multiple pieces of information short term memory, the problems are very different than if looking at pattern recognition. So I would caution against a single answer. However if we don't understand which subtests are particularly problematic and what the epistemological problems look for each subtest, then many of the really interesting questions about these tests (for example why do Asians score higher than whites) are forever out of reach. > Welcome to psychometrics, where there is no outside world available for objective instrumentation. Yep.