It remains a rigorous and statistically valid study. I wish they’d excluded the race-based portion of the study because it’s so ideologically toxic, but their primary point was that society was becoming increasingly biased in favour of individuals with higher IQ or “G” quotients, and that this should concern us as it could lead to further wealth polarisation along this axis. At no point is the claim made that IQ is a measure of human worth, or a complete accounting of intelligence - just that this measurement seemed to be correlated with better life outcomes. I really wish they’d left the study at non-Hispanic whites because that’s a pretty important observation and something we should consider as a society. E.g. if a perfect “meritocracy” were instantiated in terms of economic rewards, that would be far from ideal if it meant throwing everybody else to the wolves just because they’re less economically productive in that model.
The concept of IQ as a crude basic tool for evaluating severe mental injury or illness was perverted into a theory of social hierarchy that is only “proved” in hindsight.
At no point is the claim made that IQ is a measure of human worth, or a complete accounting of intelligence
That’s a bald faced lie. Tons of eugenic theory revolves around the alleged primacy of intelligence as measured through IQ. The Mensa Club admits based on IQ. Employers can and do make hiring decisions based on IQ and similar exams. “Bell Curve” is exhaustively referenced as the legitimizing theory for these policies.
The study was produced by an individual who has made numerous moral claims outside of his writing and cited as motivation for moral crusades by his friends and political allies.
Sure, you want to believe it’s bullshit. But then you get to Stanford and find out “The Bell Curve” is required reading in your social circle.
It remains a rigorous and statistically valid study. I wish they’d excluded the race-based portion of the study because it’s so ideologically toxic, but their primary point was that society was becoming increasingly biased in favour of individuals with higher IQ or “G” quotients, and that this should concern us as it could lead to further wealth polarisation along this axis. At no point is the claim made that IQ is a measure of human worth, or a complete accounting of intelligence - just that this measurement seemed to be correlated with better life outcomes. I really wish they’d left the study at non-Hispanic whites because that’s a pretty important observation and something we should consider as a society. E.g. if a perfect “meritocracy” were instantiated in terms of economic rewards, that would be far from ideal if it meant throwing everybody else to the wolves just because they’re less economically productive in that model.
The concept of IQ as a crude basic tool for evaluating severe mental injury or illness was perverted into a theory of social hierarchy that is only “proved” in hindsight.
That’s a bald faced lie. Tons of eugenic theory revolves around the alleged primacy of intelligence as measured through IQ. The Mensa Club admits based on IQ. Employers can and do make hiring decisions based on IQ and similar exams. “Bell Curve” is exhaustively referenced as the legitimizing theory for these policies.
I’m aware, but the study itself makes no moral claims.
The study was produced by an individual who has made numerous moral claims outside of his writing and cited as motivation for moral crusades by his friends and political allies.
Try to keep an open mind. Merry Christmas.
An ironic request, given the subject matter you’re defending.