| The results are really impressive. It's also comforting to see them dealing with some of the subtleties that were intuitive but not always practiced. That labeling people high and low can both be damaging. That putting children in college could sometimes save them emotionally rather than cause problems. That IQ tests are bullshit when used improperly and even the best tests are still missing people who should be nurtured. Other factors seem very important anecdotally, have these been dismissed or just not fully studied yet? 1. Socioeconomic background - they mention it's not as predictive, but how sure are we Microsoft would exist if BG's/PA's parents were illiterate and couldn't afford to give them access to computers? 2. Mental health - Someone could be a 4th standard deviation genius yet be debilitated by anxiety, depression, or some other condition. 3. Occasionally mental "disability" can seemingly be related to success. So many great scientists have been on the Autistic spectrum, or suffered from severe OCD. Can the success of the person be separated from the disorder? Could "cures" for Autism and OCD actually negatively affect scientific progress? Or could their condition cause them to be incorrectly screened out? 4. How do curiosity, motivation, and ambition affect success? Do high scoring kids automatically have these traits or is it a separate variable? |
We can be entirely sure it would not exist. This is not a hard prediction.