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

  • @mind@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -51 year ago

    Veritasium, a popular science channel on YouTube, released a video just a few days ago explaining what IQ is and how it works:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FkKPsLxgpuY

    IQ is not properly measured from a random website. If someone announced they have a 200 IQ because of some scam site, that doesn’t mean actual IQ tests are invalid. The problem is with that website, and the gullible test-taker.

    Every time I’ve heard someone say IQ tests are meaningless, 100% of the time they admit they’ve never heard of Spearman or the G factor, which would have been covered in a relevant Psychology course at university.

    It’s not everything in life, but IQ is real, measurable, and has value in predicting how well someone will do with various challenges in the future.

    • David GerardOPMA
      link
      English
      111 year ago

      most of us here have heard of them, know the history of IQ in as much detail as you need to to counter race scientists, and understand perfectly well that it’s largely nonsense, but thanks anyway

      • @mind@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -3
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        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.

        understand perfectly well that it’s largely nonsense

        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.

        • @selfMA
          link
          English
          101 year ago

          You can’t defend your position, so you call people racists when they never did anything of the sort.

          drink! and so early in the day too

          • @froztbyte
            link
            English
            71 year ago

            should we start bets on whether it’s zee in a mind suit (on a different instance)?

            • @selfMA
              link
              English
              81 year ago

              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

              • @froztbyte
                link
                English
                61 year ago

                it’s a bit amusing how literal-sealioning it is yeah

                wonder how long they can stay Novel

              • @future_synthetic
                link
                English
                41 year ago

                You want to speak to the manager? It’s me, I am the manager.

            • David GerardOPMA
              link
              English
              51 year ago

              our IQ minded friend has been escorted to the egress, so will doubtless continue responding but from servers we’re not reading from here

        • 🆘Bill Cole 🇺🇦
          link
          fedilink
          51 year ago

          @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.

    • @blakestaceyMA
      link
      English
      111 year ago

      Every time I’ve heard someone say IQ tests are meaningless, 100% of the time they admit they’ve never heard of Spearman or the G factor, which would have been covered in a relevant Psychology course at university.

      Get ready for that percentage to go down.

    • PJ Coffey
      link
      fedilink
      71 year ago

      @mind @dgerard

      This was debunked over 40 years ago.

      What is the reason for the pernicious resilience of the IQ myth?

      Spearman was never able to find a g. It’s always shown to be a statistical artefact.

      *smh* and then the fallacious comparison to climate change.

      IQ tests, in common with most “race science”, doesn’t produce good results.

      Climate change constantly does.

      You’re more like Room Temperature superconductors. (Which may even be becoming real! As opposed to IQ.)

      • David GerardOPMA
        link
        English
        71 year ago

        What is the reason for the pernicious resilience of the IQ myth?

        starts with “r” (and ends “acists”)

          • @selfMA
            link
            English
            51 year ago

            Timnit is amazing! this is going on my “watch today when work isn’t actively destroying my mind” list