The march to Nazism takes another step

  • jsomae@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 days ago

    There may not be scientific consensus on what IQ measures, but IQ=intellect is widely considered pseudoscience.

    • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 days ago

      An intelligence quotient (IQ) is a total score derived from a set of standardized tests or subtests designed to assess human intelligence.[1]

      What exactly are you claiming? That it’s not a test to measure intellect? That IQ is pseudoscience? Or that it’s not specifically generalized intellect?

      • jsomae@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 days ago

        It’s polite etiquette to mention what you’re quoting.

        Scores from intelligence tests are estimates of intelligence. Unlike, for example, distance and mass, a concrete measure of intelligence cannot be achieved given the abstract nature of the concept of “intelligence”.

        • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 days ago

          It’s polite etiquette to mention what you’re quoting.

          It’s obviously a common definition of IQ… It doesn’t really matter where it’s from as it shows that general definitions of IQ claim it’s a test of generalized intellect.

          Your quote doesn’t really refute my argument, or clarify what claim you are making?

          • jsomae@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            11 days ago

            I was quoting the same page you were quoting.

            I’d say IQ is an attempt at concretizing a notion of intelligence. There’s little consensus on what intelligence really means, so there’s not much more to say than that. In other words, IQ is just a number. More relevant is what IQ can be found to correlate with.