Let’s say IQ test do correlate with success (as measured by conventional standards). What would that prove? That a society that values high IQ rewards people with high IQs. The relevant question is Is IQ a valid measure of intelligence? Well, good luck defining intelligence in a scientifically meaningful way.
“Social intelligence”, oh boy… At this point we’re just giving common sense wisdoms—flattery gets you everywhere/the socially adept rise higher in social contexts etc—a lacquer of scientistic jargon.
My point was hypothetical. I skeptical a correlation actually exits,--damn lies in all—but that’s beside the point. My point is a society that is into boiling complex, difficult to define concepts like intelligence down to a simple metric is liable to have lots of other analogous, oversimplified metrics that are known, if not to coworkers to teachers and whoever else makes the decisions. And I’d wager people who do well on tests are apt to be the same ones who get high marks on Cognos reports—i.e., the same prejudices affect what’s deemed valuable for both.
As far as our actual society, there is only partial truth to this, we are metric obsessed of course—but nepotism and, more than anything else, the circumstances one was born into, probably play the biggest role apropos success as conventionally defined.
I’d wager people who do well on tests are apt to be the same ones who get high marks on Cognos reports—i.e., the same prejudices affect what’s deemed valuable for both.
Let’s say IQ test do correlate with success (as measured by conventional standards). What would that prove? That a society that values high IQ rewards people with high IQs. The relevant question is Is IQ a valid measure of intelligence? Well, good luck defining intelligence in a scientifically meaningful way.
“Social intelligence”, oh boy… At this point we’re just giving common sense wisdoms—flattery gets you everywhere/the socially adept rise higher in social contexts etc—a lacquer of scientistic jargon.
You do realise that it’s rare for co-workers to know each other’s IQs? Obviously there’s a third thing that both IQ and success correlate with.
My point was hypothetical. I skeptical a correlation actually exits,--damn lies in all—but that’s beside the point. My point is a society that is into boiling complex, difficult to define concepts like intelligence down to a simple metric is liable to have lots of other analogous, oversimplified metrics that are known, if not to coworkers to teachers and whoever else makes the decisions. And I’d wager people who do well on tests are apt to be the same ones who get high marks on Cognos reports—i.e., the same prejudices affect what’s deemed valuable for both.
As far as our actual society, there is only partial truth to this, we are metric obsessed of course—but nepotism and, more than anything else, the circumstances one was born into, probably play the biggest role apropos success as conventionally defined.
Well, fair enough.