Once the technology is available, I will run emulations of the people listed and have them take the most accurate intelligence test available. Resolves to whichever listed person has the highest IQ. Famous, living people only (at the time of submission - it's OK if they die after).
@RanaG I stay sane by appreciating the little things in life. Coffee in the morning, nice weather on a Saturday, people distinguishing G from IQ; the usual stuff.
I hate how the IQ debate often gets framed: "Is IQ real or are intelligence differences fake?" This is a dumb dichotomy that makes it feel like we're still in the f-ing 19th century debating between tabula raza and phrenology.
Obviously some people are smarter than others. It's just IQ is a shit measure of that difference. We can't even agree on a single definition of intelligence, let alone a unified way of measuring it. G isn't a perfect solution, but at least it acknowledges proficiencies in a variety of intellectual tasks correlate without trying to squeeze the complexity of intelligence into a one-dimensional spectrum.
@jim if polls didn't revert back to 100 mana I'd make a poll related to that.
Anyway, IDK the statistics behind it, but it seems our current IQ tests kinda suck at accurately discerning intelligence for people who score 120+ IQ (SD 15).
@jim where did Hanania say that?
Also I don't believe that's true, I think the difference between men are women in measured cognition stem from the difference of incentives and motivation to performance
@Schwabilismus logic. Brains are pretty similar to each other. Variation is pretty limited. Social media, books, other recordings, anecdotes, stories... the data is more than enough to figure out roughly what the person's brain is like.
@Schwabilismus if everyone just trusted the criteria and that the market will resolve to the truth, then the market will resolve to the truth (by being efficient everyday)