nostr:nprofile1qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnyd968gmewwp6kyqpqxxt83adj3l3grgwtz9dkxfwvun97hz0mguc3rpe23kkdc46etcgqyn4fmn although intelligence is far too nuanced and multifaceted to be captured in a number, ...
@nprofile1q...
intelligence is far too nuanced and multifaceted to be captured in a number
i could agree with that, and i would go as far as to claim we can't meaningfully measure it
it does unfortunately have a statistically significant capability to predict likelyhood of some outcomes
some measures you do on an individual can predict outcomes, but that doesn't mean you were meaningfully measuring intelligence or that intelligence was the underlying cause
I think we shouldn't write off IQ because it can be useful in specific contexts; for example, showing the effect of reducing iodine deficiency :D
imo we should write it off as a measure of intelligence and treat it as "a funny number that was mostly invented so that eugenicists could pretend they were doing science". if the funny number is useful for some things and we haven't found a more useful measure, that's okay i guess
intelligence is far too nuanced and multifaceted to be captured in a number
i could agree with that, and i would go as far as to claim we can't meaningfully measure it
it does unfortunately have a statistically significant capability to predict likelyhood of some outcomes
some measures you do on an individual can predict outcomes, but that doesn't mean you were meaningfully measuring intelligence or that intelligence was the underlying cause
I think we shouldn't write off IQ because it can be useful in specific contexts; for example, showing the effect of reducing iodine deficiency :D
imo we should write it off as a measure of intelligence and treat it as "a funny number that was mostly invented so that eugenicists could pretend they were doing science". if the funny number is useful for some things and we haven't found a more useful measure, that's okay i guess
1