Video games also have potential legal advantages over IQ tests for companies. You could argue that “we only hire people good at video games to get people who fit our corporate culture of liking video games” but that argument doesn’t work as well for IQ tests.
yet again an original post title that self-sneers
Neither the LessWrong post, nor my comment, even touched on race. Pretending like either did is a strawman. You can’t defend your position, so you call people racists when they never did anything of the sort.
There have been studies like the National Longitudinal Study of Youth that showed IQ could predict many different life outcomes.
Do you think that test was fraudulent? Why are you dismissing research that is widely accepted, and published by professional psychologists who have meticulously documented their data?
This entire debate reminds me of the climate change debate: One side that cites research, data, and knows the relevant concepts. Another side who doesn’t ever cite actual research, can’t elaborate on how they got to their conclusion, and dismisses the science without giving any reason.
drink! and so early in the day too
should we start bets on whether it’s zee in a mind suit (on a different instance)?
shit, I’m just enjoying the worst parts of Reddit not realize their debatebro race scientist bullshit (likely copied from a textfile too, given the response speed) won’t work here til it’s entirely too late
it’s a bit amusing how literal-sealioning it is yeah
wonder how long they can stay Novel
You want to speak to the manager? It’s me, I am the manager.
our IQ minded friend has been escorted to the egress, so will doubtless continue responding but from servers we’re not reading from here
@mind @sneerclub Here’s the problem: that study DID NOT show that IQ could “predict” anything. It showed a CORRELATION but that’s a totally different thing. IQ is not determinative or causative of anything, because it is an entirely synthetic metric whose measurement is based on unproven and essentially unprovable theory.
The concept of “Innate General Intelligence” which IQ purports to quantify is the phlogiston of psychology.
@grumpybozo @mind @sneerclub Correlations by definition are predictive, my friend. You could argue that the predictive effect doesn’t generalize to other datasets, but the burden of proof is definitely on you to show that.
yeah, tthis guy’s on the wrong lemmy