Friday, December 07, 2018

IQ humbug

The weekly email from "Learning How to Learn" contained this:

Book of the Year
Our very favorite, most highly recommended book this year is Boyd: The Fighter Pilot Who Changed the Art of War. This book ranks among our favorite biographies ever. Boyd was a genius level iconoclast (with a measured IQ of 90), and a rebel of the first order, who changed the military’s approach to war and saved countless lives while he was at it. Boyd took on idiocy where ever he found it, whether with bombastic Pentagon generals who were happy to fake important tests, or those who thought they could outgun him in the air. Boyd was so witty, engaging, and fearless in tackling new approaches, and the research behind this extraordinary biography is so artfully done, that it’s a “can’t miss” book for anyone who loves rebels and reading. OODA away!
The highlighted phrase caught my eye.  Wiki has an extensive article on Boyd; but (without reading the book), the best I can do is from a review of this book:

Coram pushes on quickly through Boyd's early school years, covering seemingly inconsequential tidbits such as Boyd's being gifted in math but being pegged with an IQ of only 90. Although the test was suspect, Boyd refused to retake the test and later Boyd used this score to humiliate those who challenged him in a battle of wits.
...
...


Assigned to F-86s, Boyd flies 29 combat sorties in Korea, damages one MiG but gets no kills. After Korea, Boyd returns to the States and is selected to attend the prestigious Fighter Weapons School, graduate school for fighter pilots at Nellis AFB, near Las Vegas. Boyd impresses the FWS instructors and is invited back as in instructor. But Boyd wants to do more than fly and instruct. He wants to "tweak" tactics. Realizing his university education has not equipped him for his tasks, Boyd teaches himself calculus and then formulates equations to demonstrate aircraft performance. To the chagrin of fighter pilots, Boyd adds more academics to FWS, but Boyd is out to teach fighter pilots more than just how to fly: Boyd wants to teach them how to think. But Boyd retains his stick-and-rudder skills, and to prove it, he puts forth the challenge.
...
...
Coram plots out Boyd's continuing quest for more knowledge. Boyd applies for post-graduate schooling and the USAF advises him he can study electrical engineering. Boyd has other ideas. Boyd wins. He attends Georgia Tech, and it is there, studying industrial engineering, that Boyd gets his fingertips on the grail he has been chasing.

Struggling with thermodynamics, Boyd wrestles with the concept of entropy (the amount of energy available to do work) and during a late-night discussion with a fellow student, Boyd realizes it is not airspeed or power that gives the fighter pilot the victory. It is energy.


Comments (4)

Loading... Logging you in...
  • Logged in as
Let's see, some clearly brilliant guy once got a low score on a "suspect" IQ test and that shows IQ is humbug?

Hard to believe your education at two of the world's most prestigious universities didn't cover statistics and error analysis.
1 reply · active 329 weeks ago
The clearly brilliant guy was smart enough to know that IQ was humbug and so he didn't redo the test. He's in a class with Richard Feynman in this regard.
The trouble with your reasoning here is that a ton of evidence indicates that statistically IQ is a very good predictor of several different competencies. Random statistical outliers, especially on a single (supposedly suspect) test don't prove anything. A more interesting question is what is the statistical variance. That question has been well studied and the results mean a lot more than one or one hundred notable exceptions.

It's been known for many decades that IQ tests miss a bunch of geniuses, and may even have a slight tendency to miss them since genius is often idiosyncratic. It's also been known that they are either the very best or one of the very best known predictors of academic and many other types of success.

What is still not known about IQ, after well over a century of research, is what the underlying wetware and software differences behind IQ differences are. They aren't likely to remain unknown for more than a couple more decades.
1 reply · active 327 weeks ago
Consider the ranking of students in a particular high school in a particular grade. That is what IQ gives you, at best.

IQ does not generalize across different generations of the same culture (the Flynn Effect) and nor across cultures. It is not rooted in biology. The smart and psychological sound types ignore IQ altogether.

Post a new comment

Comments by