Interesting! If I understand it right, the study was not about IQ as a whole (g), but about people with exceptional mathematical OR verbal abilities. The study says that those who were good at math at 13 mostly accomplished things in math-heavy sciences and those who scored high at language mostly accomplished things in the humanities. S…
Interesting! If I understand it right, the study was not about IQ as a whole (g), but about people with exceptional mathematical OR verbal abilities. The study says that those who were good at math at 13 mostly accomplished things in math-heavy sciences and those who scored high at language mostly accomplished things in the humanities. So far, I don't think the study contradicts my general assumption that the top performers in every sport tend to be spefically gifted in their own sport. Math wizards became good at math and related stuff, language wizards became good at language and related stuff. IQ test wizards become good at IQ tests and related stuff.
The question is what is related to IQ tests. I have modified my stance slightly since I wrote the article above. I now believe that general IQ is related to a person's ability to learn general stuff. I also think that is a weakness of the IQ measurement for searching for special abilities: General IQ is related to a person's ability to achieve general stuff. But polymaths went out of fashion already in the 18th century. What is needed now are special abilities that can achieve special things that haven't yet been achieved. I think general IQ is, and has always been, a blunt measure for that.
Interesting! If I understand it right, the study was not about IQ as a whole (g), but about people with exceptional mathematical OR verbal abilities. The study says that those who were good at math at 13 mostly accomplished things in math-heavy sciences and those who scored high at language mostly accomplished things in the humanities. So far, I don't think the study contradicts my general assumption that the top performers in every sport tend to be spefically gifted in their own sport. Math wizards became good at math and related stuff, language wizards became good at language and related stuff. IQ test wizards become good at IQ tests and related stuff.
The question is what is related to IQ tests. I have modified my stance slightly since I wrote the article above. I now believe that general IQ is related to a person's ability to learn general stuff. I also think that is a weakness of the IQ measurement for searching for special abilities: General IQ is related to a person's ability to achieve general stuff. But polymaths went out of fashion already in the 18th century. What is needed now are special abilities that can achieve special things that haven't yet been achieved. I think general IQ is, and has always been, a blunt measure for that.