Hacker Newsnew | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit login

Then why does it correlate so high with income, even after being adjusted by the economic background of the measured person's parents?

Probably because the thing it correlates the most with is reading for pleasure, and that's easily done in a household that could afford lots of extracurricular books.

The myth that IQ tests measure any tangible internal capacity (or that they were even designed to do so rather than to justify the exclusion of eastern european immigrants and racism against blacks) will stay as the dominant view because the people who set the dominant view are people who get good scores on IQ tests.


> and that's easily done in a household that could afford lots of extracurricular books.

But that is already adjusted for.

IQ tests highly correlate to a number of factors. More likely to read, less likely to get divorced, more likely to go to university, more likely to eat healthily, etc. But at the end of the day, when you keep trying to control for each of these factors you end up at the null hypothesis simply because there is nothing left to measure.

Just because something is politically incorrect doesn't mean it is wrong.


They adjust IQ scores for income? I missed that.

It has nothing to do with political correctness - it was literally the purpose of general intelligence tests to justify exclusionary immigration, racism and eugenics, and they were designed (or redesigned in some cases, such as when blacks in the military scored better than whites) to do that well. It reified a general intelligence concept that has no actual evidence, and justified that with factor analysis, the leading tool of statisticians for creating a single thing out of a maelstorm of complicated, interdependent factors by just pretending that they are linear.

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mismeasure_of_Man

IQ tests correlate far higher with pleasure reading in childhood than any other factor IIRC.

This is not sour grapes - I'm a member of MENSA (which is really a boardgaming club); it's just historically accurate. IQ tests could be completely replaced with a tally of books read for pleasure (and the reading level of those texts), and you would end up with all of the same correlations without all of the self-important mathy-sciency tone.

I accept that there's a difference in the amount of knowledge that people have accumulated, and the amount of familiarity about how to evaluate common classes of questions that a voracious reader will have seen a million times before, and that a lack of those things may create a lot of challenges in college. I have no issue with the SAT. My issue is with the completely unjustified leap to a belief of differences in capacity, and the projection of this onto reified folk theoretical (theory-theory) internal states. This mythology is just another cultural construct to separate humans into "us" and "the others" and to alleviate the cognitive dissonance between our proclaimed ethics and open prejudice. Being a measure of the status quo, primarily, it serves solely to perpetuate it, offering no other benefit.

edit: early intelligence tests actually had questions that assumed you knew details about current baseball teams.

edit2: I also noticed that, other than reading for pleasure, the other examples that you listed for high correlation with IQ are degrees of adherence to cultural norms. Are high IQ people simply better at obedience?


Says tau/2.





Applications are open for YC Winter 2016

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact