Patrick Elliott <sel### [at] npgcablecom> wrote:
> The fact that it isn't a statistical measure of relative mental ages, so 
> much as a statistical representation of how much one conforms to a 
> specific set of social parameters and ideas, which have jack to do with 
> *actually* being intelligent.

  I really think that's more a biased "political correctness" ideology
speaking than anything that has been extensively and scientifically studied.

  An IQ test *does* tell something about the mental difference between
people. In some cases it might indicate natural talent, in other cases
it might indicate the result of learning and training, but nevertheless
it does indicate some differences between people.

  Many PC advocates don't like the idea that some people might be truely
more intelligent than others, as they have this utopistic view of the world
where everyone is equal and any differences between people are artificial
and only lead to discrimination.

  However, just because they *say* that IQ tests are BS and that IQ
differences between people are an artificial construct doesn't make it so.
Some people might not like it that others are more intelligent than them,
but that doesn't change the facts of life.

> Until/unless someone 
> finds a valid means to separate measures of mental development from the 
> social memes and mores of the culture they are being tested in, its not 
> a valid test of anything, other than general forms of conformity to 
> arbitrary definitions of "intelligence".

  That's precisely the PC-ideology speaking: "It's not a valid test of
*anything*". That's BS. Of course it's a valid test of *something*, and
more precisely, something related to people's brains. You might not like
the implications, but that doesn't change the fact. Simply wishing the
tests were completely irrelevant doesn't make it so.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message