>>16762430
Yes, IQ tests are a meme. Think about what it claims to be. A multiple choice test that presumably measures innate traits.

Are we aware of any other written test that can do that and where it's impossible to skew the results by training motivation and incentives? We dont, right? So it's actually quite an extraordinary claim, what IQ proponents claim their test is capable of.

Now, can you think of a way to test how susceptible IQ tests are to training effects, motivation, knowledge about test design, incentives, etc? You can, right? It's not hard at all. All we have to do is to design empirical trials where we provide test subjects with knowledge about how the test works, we let them practice, we give them incentives, and then we observe how the test results were affected.

Are you aware of any IQ proponents that have performed such studies? No, you're not, are you. What do they do instead? They refer to various types of statistical studies and mathematical statistical methods, right? But as any masters student can tell you, statistics, especially with literally millions of uncontrolled variables, yield infinitely less reliable results than controlled experiments. So why would IQ proponents elect to do the former, when the latter is not challenging at all? You'd have to be IQ retard to not figure out the answer to that one...