I got two ideas from that writing:
- Is not a good idea to take a single dimensional indicator for a multidimensional capability. I suppose that know about IQs can discuss about that.
- That having a high IQ is not a so great predictor on how well you will solve a real world problem. If we define "real world problems" the ones with feedback loops, plenty of noise, and known and unknown unknowns (his field of work) then he may have a point. But that is a subset of the real world problems, and anyway you may have to solve ideal world problems too.
Nassim Taleb on IQ
31–38 of 38 posts
Re: Nassim Taleb on IQ
#32If many millionaires have IQs around 100, & 58 y.o. back office clercs at Goldman Sachs or elsewhere an IQ of 155 (true example), clearly the measurement is less informative than claimed.
it is important to distinguish the macro from the micro point of view.
From the micro point of view, a talented individual has a greater a priori probability to reach a high level of success than a moderately gifted one.
On the other hand, from the macro point of view of the entire society, the probability to find moderately gifted individuals at the top levels of success is greater than that of finding there very talented ones, because moderately gifted people are much more numerous and, with the help of luck, have - globally - a statistical advantage to reach a great success, in spite of their lower individual a priori probability.
Re: Nassim Taleb on IQ
#33Part of the challenge with measuring stuff is we usually stop when we have a single measurement. IQ is a repeatable thing but the problem - to my naive self - is that its called intelligence quotient and the idea of giving it a single measurement is ridiculous as there are more factors than one. Intelligence is probably going to be a maximum within the system youre measuring against. Maybe high IQ is great for resear…
This is a classic discussion in the intelligence literature. For example, the cattell-horn-carroll theory[1]. Usually meauring general intelligence involves measures along a bunch of different problem domains. [1]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cattell–Horn–Carroll_theory
Oh neat! Id never heard of that before.
Re: Nassim Taleb on IQ
#34Is there a coherent train of thought in these tweets, other than Taleb's disdain for IQ[1]? I'm struggling to understand why a measurement that appears to have no value "measures best the ability to be a good slave," or why any of this entails the belief that "the only robust measure of "rationality" & "intelligence" is survival." [1]: A position that, as far as I know, is neither controversial nor contentious in aca…
I couldn’t find any and it was painful to read, no actual argument or a hypothesis just random anecdotes and banter. For example: “I've spent 34 years working w/"High IQ" quants. I've rarely seen them survive, not blow up on tail events.” How many “low IQ” quants did he work with? With all due respect to Taleb I’m not sure that anyone who’s even simply above average would make it as a quant or even be attracted to ma…
In other words, IQ is a statistical parameter (offering no information whatsoever about individuals) but this smart guy quotes local anecdotes and moreover from the vantage point of an environment populated by outliers.
Re: Nassim Taleb on IQ
#35I like Taleb's work. It's always good food for thought and frequently insightful. That said, his posture towards academia of late seems a bit juvenile and not a little annoying. Which isn't to say that he doesn't have a point, but it gets pretty frustrating when I pay good money for a book (Antifragile) and every other page is taking potshots at "fragilistas" and talking about how those dumb intellectuals don't actua…
The most salient anecdote Taleb tells about himself is the one where he's going onstage to debate an opponent. He asks his publisher if punching the other guy in the face would be against his contract, and his publisher notes that it would be very good for book sales. All Taleb does is punch people in the face nowadays. It's probably very good for book sales. He notes elsewhere, rightly I think, that the goal of anyb…
The problem with that strategy is that this isn't boxing. There isn't a sideshow first followed by an objective measure of skill. Arguments are directly judged by their presentation. So I guess you can argue that it's a tradeoff—get your ideas in front of more people by diluting their potency with juvenile antics—but frankly I think that's a short-term strategy and doesn't produce works with staying power. If his goal is just to make money it's probably smart. If his goal is just to carve out a space for other people to carry forward the debate then that's debatably also smart. But if he's really trying to present and defend his ideas in a credible way I think it's counterproductive.
Re: Nassim Taleb on IQ
#36Stripping the article of the author (whom I don’t actually know much about other than he seems to have showed up next to Nate Silver at some point), I found this “thread” to be a bunch of personal anecdotes and “intelligent looking formulas and stuff” taken out of context to support the general conclusion that IQ is a bad metric for intelligence, as Taleb would know because he clearly has a very high IQ (note: this i…
It's not pseudoscientific buddy completely legitimate
Re: Nassim Taleb on IQ
#37Stripping the article of the author (whom I don’t actually know much about other than he seems to have showed up next to Nate Silver at some point), I found this “thread” to be a bunch of personal anecdotes and “intelligent looking formulas and stuff” taken out of context to support the general conclusion that IQ is a bad metric for intelligence, as Taleb would know because he clearly has a very high IQ (note: this i…
It's not pseudoscientific buddy completely legitimate
BTW r u a grad student at Cornell ?
Re: Nassim Taleb on IQ
#38Is there a coherent train of thought in these tweets, other than Taleb's disdain for IQ[1]? I'm struggling to understand why a measurement that appears to have no value "measures best the ability to be a good slave," or why any of this entails the belief that "the only robust measure of "rationality" & "intelligence" is survival." [1]: A position that, as far as I know, is neither controversial nor contentious in aca…
IQ is the most replicated finding in psychology, and almost certainly the most used. It is very far from being of no value. http://www1.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/reprints/1997whygmatte... Why g Matters: The Complexity of Everyday Life LINDA S. GOTTFREDSON University of Delaware Personnel selection research provides much evidence that intelligence (g) is an important predictor of performance in training and on the job…
Maryam Mirzakhani the High IQ fields medallist lady died from cancer microsoft co founder had cancer 3 times intelligence has nothing to do with cancer occurence