Message from @The Big Oof
Discord ID: 488244319623577622
^
eh
fine, whatever
right
this isn't an important point anyway
it doesn't matter what the findings of his study were
That's a VERY big difference when it comes to science
so it shouldn't be used as a source
we spent way too much time arguing something minor that can be seen from both points, depending on how you wish to construe it
Tainted or inconclusive <:unequal:473954748517842954> no correlation
if he meddled in their lives it sort of is a bad source
the context in which I read said source presented it in an entirely different way
Anyhow
Well it's easy for agenda pushers on either side to twist the findings around
Beyond that, there's still a myriad of issues with IQ itself
Most of the objections are trivial or political
Many critics argue for even worse things than IQ
IQ is *currently* the best we have
not really
it neglects so many factors and other forms of intelligence
Also, to your credit, from what I read while it did find on average that their incomes were higher, the difference was certainly noticeable but non substantial since they pursued normal occupations @SilverLining
Those other forms of intelligence have lower predictive power than IQ
in general*
that's what I was trying to point out, more or less
that there was a negligible impact
I didn't gather that the impact was negligible
just that it wasn't as great as predicted
two different things
relatively minimal, at any rate
which in coordination with the vast number of surpassing outliers
To your arbitrary standard
That wasn't what I gathered, but let's move on
means that one shouldn't base any policies upon IQ
anyhow
beyond the test
and I'm sure you probably read this when reading the study...
IQ correlates heavily to nutrition and education...
or just socioeconomic background in general
Those things have truth to them, but the extent to which they impact it are pretty debatable
to an incredibly large extent
why am I arguing this at 2 am