-->
@Smithereens
You might be thinking of epigenetics.
Ok, either way, IQ abilities is correlated to our nutrition. Sleep is correlated to IQ abilites. Etc so on and so on.
Nutrition and sleep affect all functions of humans.
You might be thinking of epigenetics.
9 days later
Rightist tend to focus on the former, leftist on the latter.
For an individual an IQ test result doesn't mean much, but in large populations we see trends and correlations that are very useful for scientific study
Black people are more likely to be rapists, but if you're talking to one black guy you have no way of knowing if hes a rapist or not because that statistic is an aggregate statistic.You won't notice it on an individual level as correlations only appear when you sum thousands of cases.
10 days later
In fact, I.Q. predicts income and educational achievement (things which, I hope we can agree, are indicators of intelligence)Not only that, but I.Q. is the best predictor of educational level, occupational level and income level (again, more indications of intelligence).
11 days later
Well stated.IQ is a psychometric for g factor, which accounts for around 30-50% of variance between different cognitive skills. The other 50% variance is not accounted for by the g factor. If you claim g factor is a true measure of "intelligence" you're about 50% correct, which is exactly how much predictive validity you have to work with.Intelligence theories use factor models and IQ is one of them. the g factor is the most broad and is only apparent after dimentionality reduction. Each IQ test has subsets that all items load onto, and each loading itself loads onto the g factor with pretty high strength. As with all factor reductions, a lot of variance is sacrificed in the process. Anyone who claims the g factor is the only predictor of intelligence doesn't understand factor analysis. It's merely the most obvious predictor. A scree plot however would show you that the sum of the next dozen strongest factors summed together wouldn't match the eigenvalue of the g factor, so it's clearly the only factor worth using.In short, IQ is a measure of g factor, g factor is the correlation of performance between unrelated cognitive tests, and the g factor accounts for up to 50% of the variance in performance. For an individual an IQ test result doesn't mean much, but in large populations we see trends and correlations that are very useful for scientific study.
20 days later
I.Q. predicts income and educational achievement (things which, I hope we can agree, are indicators of intelligence) better than parental socioeconomic status. Not only that, but I.Q. is the best predictor of educational level, occupational level and income level (again, more indications of intelligence). Surprisingly, I.Q. even beats 'grades' as a predictor of educational level. The average sample size for the groups is approximately 97,000:
25 days later
I think IQ is an excellent indicator of intelligence, I don't know about the whole educational level or occupational level corresponding to intelligence. Maybe I'm biased because I am a bit of an outlier...
In my personal life it can intimidate people for whatever reason.