[digikata]

If anything science tends to point more to the fact that there isn't a single metric of intelligence that is somehow the most important. Maybe the most important factor isn't intelligence at all and is some combination of intelligence, communication and charisma? Even if there some set of human dominating factors, there's no guarantee that the order of the world in that moment would consistently value that factor without changing to another. There isn't even a guarantee that at the same point in time the same fitness tests are applied consistently - in one corner of the world one set of characteristics if favored, and and in another it's a different set. Heck, in the same city there's a huge variation...

In this environment the best we can to is provide somewhat consistent access to resources to encourage the development human ability in all its varied forms.

[rewqfdsa]

That's a nice fantasy --- oh, everyone's smart, just as different things. It just ain't true.

Science tells us that IQ is a general mental cognitive factor; tasks can be more or less heavily g-weighted, but intelligence is strongly correlated to all sorts of things, like mortality (inversely), lifetime income, accomplishment, marriage stability, and so on.

Try again.

[dang]

Please stop using HN to beat the same ideological dead hobby-horses over and over again. It is not what this site is for.

Please also edit the incivility out of your comments. There's no need for a nasty swipe like "Try again."

[rewqfdsa]

> Please stop using HN to beat the same ideological dead hobby-horses over and over again

Which specific facts are inappropriate to mention on HN?