this post was submitted on 20 Aug 2024
240 points (95.1% liked)

collapse of the old society

904 readers
62 users here now

to discuss news and stuff of the old world dying

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Meet the new right, same as the old right.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] azertyfun@sh.itjust.works 6 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Controlling for confounding factors is, like, half the point.

Racists will tell you [x country] is lower IQ than [y developed country]. Which is probably true. What they won't say is that that average IQ is probably the same as [y developed country 100-200 years ago]. IQ being affected by education is the whole fucking point; widespread access to a good and long education provably leads to a more intelligent population, which we have seen time and time again with industrializing countries (including in the West since the IQ test is old enough that we can see the average IQ rising since the industrial revolution).

[–] conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

No, it provably leads to a country that scores higher on an IQ test.

IQ is not intelligence.

[–] azertyfun@sh.itjust.works 5 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Can you please give a definition of intelligence that does not correlate with IQ? Because scientists have been trying, and as far as I know, failing.

Or I guess we can keep pretending that intelligence is fully inquantifiable and therefore we won't be able to quantify how socioeconomic background affect people's wellbeing. I guess that does have the upside that we don't have to face the hard truths of our world, that unequal access to healthcare and education does affect people's cognitive abilities and that the worse life outcomes of poor people being self-inflicted is a myth perpetuated by the ruling class to justify their continued oppression. No, it must be the IQ tests that are racist.

[–] conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

The fact that it's affected by environment is the evidence that it's not intelligence. Intelligence is not malleable. IQ is.

[–] azertyfun@sh.itjust.works 5 points 3 weeks ago

[citation needed]

[–] LustyArgonianMana@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

"Sex, Lies, and Brain Scans" talks about IQ and the problems with IQ. There's also "Delusions of Gender" by Cordelia Fine, and "Neurolinguistics and Linguistic Aphasia."

First, I have had a neuropsych evaluation done and an IQ test. It has areas that are subjective and open to interpretation by the test administrator, already making IQ tests suspect. There is no way to quantify intelligence using actually measurable data. Sound is measured in Hz, light in nanometers, and these things fit nicely on a scale with numbers. Intelligence doesn't require something so discrete. Octopuses, parrots, elephants, all have different brain anatomy from us and each other and are all quite intelligent. It's hard to say what the secret sauce even is, let alone measure it quantifiably.

Many neuropsych tests aren't actually able to prove anything substantial about the brain itself or a person's abilities, short of serious cognitive tests like the clock test which is also fallible. The reason for this is that most human intelligence is pretty close to each other and it's actually hard to find substantial, consistent differences in the population. Think of how close in intelligence a bear is to a human - trash can design at Yellowstone is famously difficult because bear and human intelligence overlap so much. Humans are much more alike cognitively with each other than a bear.

Second, we have the issue of implicit bias and priming. That tells certain groups if they are allowed to be "good" at something, if something is "meant" for them, if they will do well at it. When controlled for cognitive bias, IQ levels across most groups are equal and IQ tends to start to measure persistence/"resiliency" between the groups - which can be affected by something as simple as a coffee that morning or bad sleep.

Last, we have actual medical conditions that make it hard to communicate and pass an IQ test, but the person's IQ is intact/normal for them. There are musical geniuses that aren't picked up by IQ tests, as well as athletic geniuses (Wayne Gretsky), artistic geniuses, and social geniuses.

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

And when the scores rise, they're adjusted to the mean. Because 100 means of average intelligence, and the average intelligence rises, so the average is adjusted for.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn_effect

Ulric Neisser estimated that using the IQ values of 1997, the average IQ of the United States in 1932, according to the first Stanford–Binet Intelligence Scales standardization sample, was 80. Neisser states that "Hardly any of them would have scored 'very superior', but nearly one-quarter would have appeared to be 'deficient.'" He also wrote that "Test scores are certainly going up all over the world, but whether intelligence itself has risen remains controversial."