Message from @Alice Redacted

Discord ID: 531597070298120202


2019-01-06 22:13:25 UTC  

Like

2019-01-06 22:13:46 UTC  

Pattern recognition isn't the be all end all of intelligence, y'know?

2019-01-06 22:14:12 UTC  

give me a psychometric that is taken more objectively by psychologists

2019-01-06 22:14:29 UTC  

But like

2019-01-06 22:14:31 UTC  

even the...

2019-01-06 22:14:35 UTC  

Vocabulary may be biased

2019-01-06 22:14:42 UTC  

umm... what?

2019-01-06 22:14:53 UTC  

everything you're saying amount to "this test isn't perfect"

2019-01-06 22:14:59 UTC  

we already know that

2019-01-06 22:15:04 UTC  

More

2019-01-06 22:15:13 UTC  

we're arguing that it's the best test we have, even if ti's not that great

2019-01-06 22:15:14 UTC  

"The test is complete garbage and fails to account for a large number of things"

2019-01-06 22:15:24 UTC  

Just look at gardner's multiple intelligences

2019-01-06 22:15:33 UTC  

or... any number of other proposed metrics

2019-01-06 22:15:46 UTC  

IQ is only around because it was the first and enjoyed brief popularity among eugenics movements

2019-01-06 22:15:46 UTC  

is the test complete garbage when I consider differences of 20 points? or population differences?

2019-01-06 22:16:03 UTC  

Basically, what you're saying amounts to

2019-01-06 22:16:14 UTC  

"No, the test is completely okay and reasonable, any issues don't matter because it exists"

2019-01-06 22:16:34 UTC  

no, my agument is that if IQ tests go, so does all of psychometrics

2019-01-06 22:16:55 UTC  

So...

2019-01-06 22:16:58 UTC  

Because a single test

2019-01-06 22:17:01 UTC  

created over a century ago

2019-01-06 22:17:03 UTC  

iq was found to correlate with greater success, albeit not perfectly @Alice Redacted

2019-01-06 22:17:06 UTC  

By someone lobbying for eugenics

2019-01-06 22:17:07 UTC  

it's the best psychometric test

2019-01-06 22:17:13 UTC  

Isn't accurate

2019-01-06 22:17:17 UTC  

Dismissing it as "garbage and only liked because it was popular" is just stupid

2019-01-06 22:17:28 UTC  

The research shows otherwise

2019-01-06 22:17:32 UTC  

due to cultural bias, not accounting for other factors, not accounting for other intelligences, etc

2019-01-06 22:17:40 UTC  

we dismiss a whole slew of tests

2019-01-06 22:17:42 UTC  

Like

2019-01-06 22:17:42 UTC  

That it is a good predictor, albeit an imperfect one

2019-01-06 22:17:44 UTC  

tell me

2019-01-06 22:17:48 UTC  

what have ya got against gardener?

2019-01-06 22:17:49 UTC  

Also, shen

2019-01-06 22:17:53 UTC  

if you want to argue that psychometry is currentyl underdeveloped , fine

2019-01-06 22:17:55 UTC  

As I've mentioned

2019-01-06 22:18:03 UTC  

It correlates with wealth to a large degree

2019-01-06 22:18:03 UTC  

@Alice Redacted Thing is between races we do see agregate differences regardless of the tests, whatever it is measureing its showing a difference.

The issue is many scientific associations will dismiss the differences with assertions rather than actually look at the evidence.

The evidence shows at times differences from 2-20 points. There is a difference however minute becaue regardless it shows differences. But the issue is does that 10 points, lets just assume we have 10 points differences between races in any arbitrary stack lets even make blacks the best. It would demonstrate a difference in learning speed. Interestingly what I notice with IQ is that as urbanization increases, regardless of area, IQ increases. Compare rural vs urban IQ and its interesting. Generally it sees that IQ might simply be a priilage of urbanized civilizations. But there are reasons some got there faster than others. And the genes might influence the mentality that gave rise to urbanized societies.

2019-01-06 22:18:05 UTC  

but dont tel me IQ tests aren its best tool

2019-01-06 22:18:13 UTC  

Those more affluent have higher IQ scores