[runarberg]

You think IQ is a real thing because people administer IQ tests to find disabilities. I beg to differ. I think that IQ is indeed a made up construct, and whether or not a test which claims to measure it is used or not has no bearing on whether or not that thing exists or not.

Note that your argument is a whole another argument from what your grandparent made (and what your parent was arguing against), which is why I went ahead and explained the pseudo-scientific nature of population IQ (which your grandparent is arguing against my in a nibling thread).

One should never dismiss the link between IQ and the eugenics movement. IQ is not a good theory, nor is it good science, we can (and should) do without it.

[tptacek]

I'm obviously not dismissing the link between IQ and the eugenics movement.

I get why you want to write all these paragraphs; I feel the same way whenever IQ comes up on HN. But you picked the wrong person to write them to. I recommend you check the search bar to see why.

[runarberg]

I see: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...

You seem to have a similar view as Eric Turkheimer. Believe in IQ without all the racist stuff (and obviously don‘t believe it is inherited). I want to go even further. I think I remember Kareem Carr had a nice debate with Turkheimer on Twitter, where Carr said:

> In my opinion, I think we would all be better off if we thought of IQ not as "intelligence" but as a measure of "standardized test taking ability".

https://en.rattibha.com/thread/1653076849717825536

In my opinion we need to sunset the term IQ. It has a troubled history and is just bad science. I also think the whole field of psychometrics has a lot to answer for. I’m not sure that field has a future (at least not as a science).

[tptacek]

No, I'm a Gusev person (like, reading within-families papers grade Gusevian), and I'm deeply skeptical of psychometrics. I was radicalized by Shalizi. But lots of tools that don't produce coherent metrics or have valid axiomatic derivations are nonetheless useful in clinical settings, and by denying that you concede to your opponents --- the "race scientists" --- the idea that you're dismissive of science that serious practitioners still deem valid. Don't surrender that card so easily.

(btw: if you're not up with Sasha Gusev yet, run don't walk --- midwit race scientists are constantly bouncing off him and it drives people crazy. curtis yarvin threatened to have imprisoned. i love him so much.)