6,353
edits
Talk:IQ: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m
→Too technical?
m (→Too technical?) |
m (→Too technical?) |
||
| Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
Firstly, the article is about IQ, and not general intelligence anyway. IQ is not 'intelligence' (whatever that is), and IQ is not ''g''. | Firstly, the article is about IQ, and not general intelligence anyway. IQ is not 'intelligence' (whatever that is), and IQ is not ''g''. | ||
The g-factor is not solely directly measuring the ability to perform well on any IQ test. It is the statistical representation of the ability to perform well on any IQ test (on average) plus any g-loaded ability extracted from standardized IQ tests via factor analysis. It very likely has a biological grounding to some extent, but it is not itself isomorphic with any biological ability or abilities. Even if a strong biological basis for the existence of ''g'' were found, it would not be isomorphic with ''g'', as 'g'' represents a statistical construct that is only partially reflective of these biological processes. | The g-factor is not solely directly measuring the ability to perform well on any IQ test. It is the statistical representation of the ability to perform well on any IQ test (on average) plus any g-loaded ability extracted from standardized IQ tests via factor analysis. It very likely has a biological grounding to some extent, but it is not itself isomorphic with any biological ability or abilities. Even if a strong biological basis for the existence of ''g'' were found, it would not be isomorphic with ''g'', as ''g'' represents a statistical construct that is only partially reflective of these biological processes. | ||
It's not only measuring IQ test ability, which is partly determined by other non-intelligence-related factors, as no one has ever denied. | It's not only measuring IQ test ability, which is partly determined by other non-intelligence-related factors, as no one has ever denied. | ||