Overall, I think the best thing is to have fluid intelligence as an essential component of the tests—if the tests focus on Shakespeare and medieval Europe then they can be accused of cultural bias
You can easily tune your fluid intelligence test in a way that gives woman an advantage or in a way that gives men an advantage.
But Raven’s progressive matrices for instance is completely objective.
If typically male forms of fluid intelligence are more important for government, then all other things being equal there should be more men in government.
If typically female forms of fluid intelligence are more important for government, then all other things being equal there should be more women in government.
Perhaps you would want a female foreign minister and a male minister of defence?
No, performance on that test is trainable.
I was also thinking that most people take the IQ test at 16 or 18, in the same way you have the SATs in the US. In fact, in the US you could just use SAT scores instead. This way, everyone would train for the test.
That doesn’t solve the issue. Who get’s to make that decision?
A lot of mental tests benefit some heuristics over other heuristics. Maybe you find a heuristic that correlates with openness to experience. If your test favors people with high openness to experience you get less conservative people in your government.
Test design is highly political if the results of the test matter.
You can easily tune your fluid intelligence test in a way that gives woman an advantage or in a way that gives men an advantage.
No, performance on that test is trainable.
If typically male forms of fluid intelligence are more important for government, then all other things being equal there should be more men in government.
If typically female forms of fluid intelligence are more important for government, then all other things being equal there should be more women in government.
Perhaps you would want a female foreign minister and a male minister of defence?
I was also thinking that most people take the IQ test at 16 or 18, in the same way you have the SATs in the US. In fact, in the US you could just use SAT scores instead. This way, everyone would train for the test.
Who’s the “you” you are talking about?
I probably should have written ‘one’.
That doesn’t solve the issue. Who get’s to make that decision?
A lot of mental tests benefit some heuristics over other heuristics. Maybe you find a heuristic that correlates with openness to experience. If your test favors people with high openness to experience you get less conservative people in your government.
Test design is highly political if the results of the test matter.