Peterson I said psycho”metrics is about a nonlinear pseudometric that shows mostly how dumb someone is. Try another question & make it “intelligent”.
No. Conscientiousness is more likely to select "paper shufflers." And sometimes papers need to be properly shuffled. You're not really denying the existence of psychometric intelligence, are you? What do you propose as a replacement?https://twitter.com/nntaleb/status/1076845397795065856 …
-
-
-
Learn from engineering and start versioning these metrics like we do software, network protocols etc ? ... it's a technical tool ... We need IQ 2.0 ... rename the whole thing (call it Standard Psychometric 100) and stop throwing this metric around like the end all be all measure.
-
Metrics in engineering are metrics. Psychology is BS. Not a single psychologist thought of redefining correlation when it is state dependent.
-
*Philosophical* psychology is not BS. Plato is Lindy. (Aquinas too.)
-
I agree. Bring it back to philosophy. Because it is not science by any yardstick, 99% closer to pseudoscience.
-
Some metrics are created to reduce the dimensions of the situation to foster understanding, but frequently without acknowledging the increase in uncertainty because the measurement process does not change.
-
John, refreshing to have a physicist. The rule of thumb: if a metric explains less than 1- x% of the variance, it is not a metric. In physics the x can be as low as 10^14. In engineering, often <10^5. In psychology often >75% of the variations come from variance.
-
Presuming that variance of metric: physics as uncertainty principle, engineering as six sigma Gaussian, with psychology as folding of unknown distributions. Imagine a multidimensional distribution as having a Pareto component, and folding it into a Gaussian with a binomial test?
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Why is a replacement necessary at all? I don’t think he’s saying “intelligence doesn’t exist.” He’s saying IQ is a tiny, narrow peep-hole that only illuminates the ability to solve pre-packaged problems supplied by others.
-
No real evidence exists that IQ is a "tiny, narrow peep-hole." IQ explains a third of wage differences, the military turns down willing job applicants with low-ish scores, it predicts EQ & predicts job success much better than EQ. Oh, and higher IQ pairs are more cooperative.
-
do you have the info on cooperation?
-
Chapters 5 & 6 of my book Hive Mind are the best resource showing that higher group IQ causes more cooperation; my experimental paper with Omar & Jaap is one piece of the evidence: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?cluster=10568748376744794714&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5&sciodt=0,5 …
-
openness being important, what does it mean that individual IQ doesn’t predict cooperation?
-
It means that when higher IQ players were matched with the average person, the high IQ player wasn't especially nice. High IQ people aren't doormats; they're not just generally nice. But they're apparently good at figuring out when they're with a person who thinks "Win-Win"pic.twitter.com/ODYJMD7ZIM
-
I have an analogy in the introduction to Hive Mind, the study at Vanderbilt: https://www.sup.org/books/extra/?id=23082&i=Introduction.html …pic.twitter.com/Xcy5VfBTj4
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
We need to get the two of you in the same room
-
I'd pay to see that
-
On Joe Rogan -
@joerogan make it happen
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Ppl saying this IQ debate is the greatest crossover event since Infinity War
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
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.