[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.)