You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
There's a new Shalizi/Taleb on the block. Wrote this long anti-IQ piece. It's kinda boring but looks impressive so I am sure will be popular. I assume someone is going to write a rebuttal for the relevant parts, most of it being irrelevant philosophy.https://medium.com/@seanaaron100/intelligence-complexity-and-the-failed-science-of-iq-4fb17ce3f12 …
This actually is a reasonably interesting critique. The objection is that factor analysis & g doesn't present a mechanistic model of human intelligence that shows us the causality. Which is true! However this doesn't invalidate IQ science.pic.twitter.com/dyyaSsX9ln
No one said it did. Jensen said the opposite tons of times. However, people generally do affirm the reflective interpretation meaning that the PC1/g does index general intelligence even if it fails as a ratio scale measure. FA alone cannot show this is right but other methods can
A lot of critiques of IQ I have seen end up as a "demand for specific evidence". This is basically that; the author isn't satisfied without a causal model of how the brain works and all the cause and effect that generates the correlations we see.https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/vqbieD9PHG8RRJddu/you-re-entitled-to-arguments-but-not-that-particular-proof …
The g denial part is pathetic, all tests mesure the same g this isn't a PCA artifact
Havne't you heard? They are all based on correlation! Correlation bad.
Correlation isn't bad, but there's a real risk of non linearities and/or mirage correlations
outcome ~ IQ are usually quite linear when checked. This is an old issue. Even when nonlinear, it's almost always monotonic. (Aside from sampling error) http://arthurjensen.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Occupation-and-Income-Related-to-Psychometric-g-2001-by-Helmuth-S%C3%B8rensen-Nyborg-Arthur-Robert-Jensen.pdf …pic.twitter.com/K3vQBrJhcA
You have to give him props for including this amazing chartpic.twitter.com/qKj51eHVjk
Super meta
Seems the only empirical critique here with substance that is not typically controlled for is that of range restrictions - something people already know about and actively try to make better tests for. In other words, gish gallop. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop …pic.twitter.com/FW5E5xkhq3
I lost count of how many paragraphs it took before he had the decency to actually start his argument...
the section on measurement error is pretty funny
It is one of the very few issues that all or 99% of all empirical or semi-empirical biologists [and natural scientists otherwise] agrees at least 51% with Taleb. Institutional/academic adaptivity correlate to some extent with IQ scores, but far from enough to make it plausible.
Boring. Can't be bothered any more. Nothing's new there. "The shit is so complex that you can't use correlations to deduce *anything* until you understand *all* of the complexity" is simply neither serious nor honest an argument.
"most of it being irrelevant philosophy" haha my man
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
