That has nothing to do with a measure: whether or not IQ accurately measures intelligence is independent of whether it’s predictive of success.
We all know NBA success requires more than height, however, height is still a measurement — not of total value in a person (even in regards to just basketball), but still of a real and objective difference between people.
Similarly, IQ doesn’t predict success, but is measuring a real and objective difference between people. Mr Taleb seems to confuse “cant predict a multi-factor outcome alone” with “isn’t measuring anything objective”. Again, IQ isn’t a measure of a persons value (or success) — just of a genuine variance in people’s mental abilities.
Mr Taleb unfortunately tries to extend the point that there’s more to success than raw intelligence to some kind of misplaced attack on the notion of measuring intelligence. That argument is as nonsense as insisting I can’t measure height, because not every tall person plays in the NBA.
We all know NBA success requires more than height, however, height is still a measurement — not of total value in a person (even in regards to just basketball), but still of a real and objective difference between people.
Similarly, IQ doesn’t predict success, but is measuring a real and objective difference between people. Mr Taleb seems to confuse “cant predict a multi-factor outcome alone” with “isn’t measuring anything objective”. Again, IQ isn’t a measure of a persons value (or success) — just of a genuine variance in people’s mental abilities.
Mr Taleb unfortunately tries to extend the point that there’s more to success than raw intelligence to some kind of misplaced attack on the notion of measuring intelligence. That argument is as nonsense as insisting I can’t measure height, because not every tall person plays in the NBA.