This runs right into the problem that Harvard ran into when they first switched away from exclusively tests - Goodhart's law applied by HBD Tests are a proxy for overall genetic quality as long as the context is humans who resulted from the same selective pressures
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @HbdNrx
Let's imagine for a second that Harvard selected purely based on height but was located in a country populated entirely with a single ethnic group. Selecting for height is a pretty good proxy then for what H is looking for - overall genetic quality and ability to lead.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @CovfefeAnon @HbdNrx
Now introduce another group that was under intense selective pressure for height alone - members of this group break the invisible correlation that H was relying on. Test scores are and always were a proxy. They were a good proxy in a mono-ethnic nation. Now they're a bad proxy.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @CovfefeAnon @HbdNrx
This is on two levels - test scores are a proxy in the first place for intelligence and intelligence is a proxy for overall genetic quality and leadership ability.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @HbdNrx
Yes, test scores are a good way of measuring IQ but IQ shouldn't be the sole concern for Harvard. CalTech/MIT? Sure The original population that motivated Harvard to move away from pure test selection demonstrates why. It's not nonsense to want Harvard to select for leadership.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
That wasn't the group to which I was referring. Asians may not undermine the IQ-test score correlation (although they do because of widespread cheating) but they certainly undermine the IQ-achievement correlation which is also important.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.