We can all easily recognize lower IQ-levels. But anything higher than our own is an abstraction and if used against me an insult.
Except in Software Engineering. One day you just realize, that some fucking dude can see the problem and its solution much better and faster. And you realize there is nothing you can do, except fake the comprehension and use fancy words.
This has nothing to do with IQ. IQ itself means nothing other than you manage to score higher on an IQ test relative to others who take the same test. The problem is (and as the article points out) that this doesn't actually measure anything about your intelligence or problem solving abilities.
It's in a sense the same way getting As in college tells you that they are a good student, but only correlates with other factors. Einstein was a B+ student in college but obviously wasn't a B+ physicist.
> IQ itself means nothing other than you manage to score higher on an IQ test relative to others who take the same test.
This has been proven again and again to not be true. IQ is highly correlated with many measures of success, it absolutely mean something other than just your ability to score well on the test.
It’s literally a problem solving test. It doesn’t require existing knowledge so it’s the only test which actually is based just on intelligence. You can’t memorise quick problem solving.
It isn't true that it doesn't require existing knowledge. A lot of it is either pattern recognition, or group theory. Both can be learned about / trained for.
No, tests such as Raven's progressive matrices, which is the predominant method nowadays, don't require any more knowledge then what a normal baby is born with.
They were in fact designed to avoid the testing problems arising from varying cultures, prior knowledge, etc...
Except in Software Engineering. One day you just realize, that some fucking dude can see the problem and its solution much better and faster. And you realize there is nothing you can do, except fake the comprehension and use fancy words.