Is the "g factor" just a rebranding of IQ, or is there any scientific basis for it? (awful.systems)

submitted 6 months ago by gerikson@awful.systems to c/sneerclub@awful.systems

NSFW 18 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The Wiki page is voluminous enough to approach gish galloping, and the Talk page is almost as big https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G_factor_(psychometrics)

Asking because someone in another forum basically said that while IQ might be discredited, "g" is valid.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] blakestacey@awful.systems 17 points 6 months ago

It's a rebranding of IQ.

[-] gerikson@awful.systems 13 points 6 months ago

Thanks for the link, I figured as much.

I decided there was no point in engaging the person in polemic on this matter (it's the kind of forum where that kind of behavior will just get the comment deleted) so decided to just add the person to my (literal) shitlist, only to discover they're already on it! Correlation or causation something something.

[-] slopjockey@awful.systems 6 points 6 months ago

What a beautiful set of sneers. Though it's sad how topical they still are.

this post was submitted on 08 Mar 2024

20 points (100.0% liked)

SneerClub

968 readers

8 users here now

Hurling ordure at the TREACLES, especially those closely related to LessWrong.

AI-Industrial-Complex grift is fine as long as it sufficiently relates to the AI doom from the TREACLES. (Though TechTakes may be more suitable.)

This is sneer club, not debate club. Unless it's amusing debate.

[Especially don't debate the race scientists, if any sneak in - we ban and delete them as unsuitable for the server.]

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

self@awful.systems

blakestacey@awful.systems

dgerard@awful.systems