isn’t psychometrics the part of Talos I where you get the psychoscope?

the gish gallop that forms the majority of this article looks like an attempt to signal jam the criticisms section (which itself isn’t anywhere near as damning as it should be):

Research on the G-factor, as well as other psychometric values, has been widely criticized for not properly taking into account the eugenicist background of its research practices.[157] The reductionism of the G-factor has been attributted to having evolved from "pseudoscientific theories" about race and intelligence.[158] Spearman's g and the concept of inherited, immutable intelligence were a boon for eugenicists and pseudoscientists alike.[159]

[…]

Some especially harsh critics have called the g factor, and psychometrics, as a form of pseudoscience.[161]

fascists will do anything to feel superior about a number they made up, and renaming IQ now that it’s got a lot of fash stank on it and pretending it’s different and sophisticated now, you wouldn’t understand is one of the older tricks in the fascist playbook

It's a rebranding of IQ.

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

That's got huge "it hasn't been disproven, yet" energy. That's basically the "it's not illegal" argument but for ideology.

The vibe I always got is that it's somewhat more sinister than IQ, in that it's purported to be an Actually Real Property of humans that's measured by IQ tests, when IQ tests in themselves don't necessarily make claims beyond raw statistical variance.

It's like talk around IQ got too careful so they made this as a sort of anti-euphemism. Disphemism??

edit: wow it's a real word

Man that wiki page is kinda shit, there's a section titled "Critique of Gould"[1], reference [178] is simply "Korb 1997", there's no link, and no hit for the name anywhere else.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G_factor_(psychometrics)#Critique_of_Gould