1 Comment
User's avatar
⭠ Return to thread
Passion guided by reason's avatar

There are many skeptics of any trend to equate IQ and worth. (And far, far fewer people who would equate the two). For example:

> "We agree emphatically with Howard Gardner, however, that the concept of intelligence has taken on a much higher place in the pantheon of human virtues than it deserves."

> "Many people conclude that if they see someone who is sensitive, humorous, and talks fluently, the person must surely have an above-average IQ. This identification of IQ with attractive human qualities in general is unfortunate and wrong"

> "All of this is another way of making a point so important that we will italicize it now and repeat elsewhere: _Measures of intelligence have reliable statistical relationships with important social phenomena, but they are a limited tool for deciding what to make of any given individual._ Repeat it we must, for one of the problems of writing about intelligence is how to remind readers often enough how little an IQ score tells about whether the human being next to you is someone whom you will admire or cherish. This thing we know as IQ is important but not a synonym for human excellence." - The Bell Curve, p21

By contrast, it will be hard to find a quote from any widely read author which defends equating IQ with human worth, but I'd be glad to have a reference if you can find one. Pending some of those, I'm questioning whether "society equates IQ with human worth" is a strawman, being a concept widely rejected by society and rarely supported.

Now, saying that being cognitively skilled and able is a useful talent in today's society would generally not be controversial, because being honest or kind or reliable or intuitive or nurturing or fast or strong are also useful talents. To say that cognitive ability is valued is true, to say that IQ is equated with worth would not be, any more than being a skilled carpenter or outrageously funny is equated with human worth.

Expand full comment