Wednesday, October 27, 2004

In a recent post on Roger Simon's blog the highly intelligent, extraordinarily gifted, and ever-interesting poster John Moore makes the argument for the use of the IQ test as a reasonable measure of intelligence. John Moore's blog Useful Fools is one of the better ones on the internet. Now I personally would hesitate to claim to have the ultimate answer as to whether IQ should be used as a "valid" or "reasonable" test of intelligence. I do however have some objections to its use which I wanted to air.

John says: "IQ is a rock solid psychometric measure." John's argument, as I understand it, is twofold: 1) that IQ is a very well-tested and reasonable test, and 2) that most of the objections to IQ are due to the fact that the results it gives are not political acceptable and so are suppressed.

I readily concede the second point. In today's highly politicized world in which most university professors believe that politics, rather than scholarship, and most journalists believe that politics, rather than getting the facts out, are their true professions, there is no doubt whatsoever that any and all facts deemed inconvenient to the ruling political elite can and will be suppressed. It happens all the time. Just try publishing a study which casts doubt on global warming in the all-new, politically correct Scientific American.

Let's assume for the sake of argument that IQ is a "rock-solid" test. Well, so is head-size. This can be measured quite accurately, with very little variation from measurement to measurement. But that isn't what people care about. What everyone wants is a proxy for "intelligence". Everyone wants to


Anonymous Anonymous said...

Did the rest of this post get chopped off?

8:36 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home