No thanks. Why would I refer to a source whose author either lied to get the results that suited his politics or was completely incompetent? From the NY Times[1]:
But now physical anthropologists at the University of Pennsylvania, which owns Morton’s collection, have remeasured the skulls, and in an article that does little to burnish Dr. Gould’s reputation as a scholar, they conclude that almost every detail of his analysis is wrong.
Frankly I have my doubts about your knowledge of the subject if you’re relying on thoroughly discredited sources.
You did nicely restate Mr. Taleb’s novel redefinition of “intelligence” as survival ability though. No doubt then Taleb believes the humble tardigrade is one of the most intelligent creatures on Earth.
I pointed you to the wikipedia page of the book for a reason. The fact that you failed to note that the study you quote has itself been debunked/criticized by later studies leads me to question your knowledge of the whole topic.
Read the section on Reassessing Morton's skull measurements and follow the links as needed.
Finally, you might also want to checkout the following;
You are in full-blown denial mode of every evidence/theory contrary to your cherished "g factor"/single general intelligence/psychometrics "belief system".
I will end this with the following observation;
In this modern day and age anybody who believes;
a Bedouin from the Sahara, a Aborigine from the Australian Outback, a Chukchi from the Northern Arctic, a tribal hunter from the Amazon Rainforest, a nomadic herder from the Mongolian Steppe, a Sherpa from the Himalayas, a Xhosa from Africa and a Techie from Silicon Valley
can all be ranked on a single scale using a single metric of "General Intelligence" is ... manifestly wrong and unscientific! The absurdity is self-evident.
Now you’re just falling back on bluster. You’re not even making claims anymore.
You may as well argue that height isn’t a scientific metric because some people have longer legs and others have longer torsos so clearly any single height metric is meaningless. It’s pure flimflammery.
In any event it’s pretty clear that your beliefs on the subject of intelligence are not evidence based, so I don’t think further discussion will be intellectually satiating for either of us.
No thanks. Why would I refer to a source whose author either lied to get the results that suited his politics or was completely incompetent? From the NY Times[1]:
Frankly I have my doubts about your knowledge of the subject if you’re relying on thoroughly discredited sources.You did nicely restate Mr. Taleb’s novel redefinition of “intelligence” as survival ability though. No doubt then Taleb believes the humble tardigrade is one of the most intelligent creatures on Earth.
[1] https://archive.is/GhiVK