No, I turned it down because of WHICH test they used, and what that said about who they wanted to employ & how their employees were expected to conform to approved patterns of thought.
The performance of IBM in the years between then & now speaks volumes about why that was a deeply flawed selection strategy.
As to intelligence, we'd better leave it there. We're going round in circles because we disagree about what we mean by intelligence - you think turning down a high paid job because it wouldn't offer the self-development you want is silly, and I think it's the intelligent thing to do... Which comes down to whether intelligence is the ability to avoid unnecessary problems, or only the ability to solve them when they arise...
So you turned down a high-paying job because they used a qualifying test. I rest my case.
I never said you were stupid but your tossing around infinity in this case is not the argument of a well-informed person.
Infinity is dangerous to mathematicians; many who studied it went mad. But it has nothing whatever to do with intelligence testing.
No, I turned it down because of WHICH test they used, and what that said about who they wanted to employ & how their employees were expected to conform to approved patterns of thought.
The performance of IBM in the years between then & now speaks volumes about why that was a deeply flawed selection strategy.
As to intelligence, we'd better leave it there. We're going round in circles because we disagree about what we mean by intelligence - you think turning down a high paid job because it wouldn't offer the self-development you want is silly, and I think it's the intelligent thing to do... Which comes down to whether intelligence is the ability to avoid unnecessary problems, or only the ability to solve them when they arise...