> The g factor going down in general wouldn't change this correlation; it's still better to be smarter no matter what the average is.
Women are famously known to not be more attracted to smarter men (by which I mean, men who the women consider more intelligent, and who are emphasizing intelligence over other things.) They're probably right; if it was evolutionarily fit, we'd already have it. But we have enough trouble with childbirth as is, and populations that are considered smarter (by people who believe IQ tests are validly constructed and administered) also often have more genetic diseases.
People who actually understand statistics like Taleb don't believe that IQ is a valid measurement or that it makes you a better person, of course, because "single number go up means better" is not how real life works.
Women are famously known to not be more attracted to smarter men (by which I mean, men who the women consider more intelligent, and who are emphasizing intelligence over other things.) They're probably right; if it was evolutionarily fit, we'd already have it. But we have enough trouble with childbirth as is, and populations that are considered smarter (by people who believe IQ tests are validly constructed and administered) also often have more genetic diseases.
People who actually understand statistics like Taleb don't believe that IQ is a valid measurement or that it makes you a better person, of course, because "single number go up means better" is not how real life works.