Well here's the thing. IMHO practical intelligence isn't accurately measured on the IQ test
There is no universally accepted definition of 'practical intelligence', any more than there is a universally accepted definition of 'g'. So right away we're conflicted in that to some people it may measure it accurately because their definitions and warrants are different than yours.
, instead you measure some subset of generalized intelligence potential. Which to me, means no more than measuring someone's aptitude to do something like play World of Warcraft.
It measures certain traits which relate strongly to potential for certain types of cognitive processes. Rather you personally think those things matter is irrelevant...it doesn't diminish the accuracy or usefulness of the tests or theory for others...especially others who deal with such things and their impacts (such as education) for a living. We don't need a mechanic or grocery bagger to understand or agree with cognitive psychology...we DO need teachers, counselors, therapists, and policy makers to at least acknowledge it however.
There are many forms of intelligence NOT measured by the test.
Absolutely true. For those things there are other theories being explored (Sternbergs Triarchic, Gardner MI, etc). NONE of that detracts from the existence or use of 'g' however.
Beyond that even the forms of intelligence that actually are measured don't correlate to practical intelligence. Sure you may measure that person's ability to perform pattern recognition, or solve boxed logic problems, but that doesn't mean they can translate that capability into anything useful. Without execution skill, you can only apply the intelligence to problems you are presented, and you probably need someone to translate your results to other human beings in an effective manner.
In simpler terms... Being able to solve an incredibly complex mathematical equation is utterly useless if the equation serves no purpose and you can't explain the solution to anyone.
You have just demonstrated that you know absolutely nothing about the field whatsoever. In fact, it demonstrates EXACTLY that you CAN do other things, and how quickly and easily you will be able to learn them compared to others. The ability to do the tasks on intelligence tests related directly to the ability to perform various cognitive functions required in an infinite number of situations (pattern recognition, mnemonics, spatial awareness and reasoning, logic, communication, etc).
There is also the previous point that there is no set definition of 'practical intelligence', and if there was it certainly wouldn't be set by you or any one person. What you think about what matters ONLY matters to you. What can be demonstrated through scientific study to be generally true of everyone does have merit however. That's how we came up with 'g' in the first place.
Then we have Paris Hilton. We are all human beings with a set lifetime of somewhere in the neighborhood of 70-100 years give or take unexpected death. I personally believe there are three measures of human quality. That is to say what determines whether a person is "better" than another.
Again, what you personally think matters ONLY matters to you personally. You're welcome to feel that way, but others will feel differently, or even the exact opposite. You don't get to disparage or refute their beliefs any more than they can yours. Which is to say, as long as you're fine with other people thinking you're an idiot, or an asshole, then you're free to do the same for them. Just don't think for one second anyone gives a shit if you 'get your way' on anything if that's going to be your attitude.
1. The impact of that individual on the whole population of humanity. For example Albert Einstein has had significant lasting impact on humanity as a whole. This makes him on some level a higher quality human being.
2. The quality of life an individual is able to sustain. For example Paris Hilton has an excellent quality of life with everything she could possibly need and then some.
3. The impact of an individual on the quality of life of those people surrounding him. For Example Paris Hilton's father.
Albert Einstein had impact on humanity because he was smart. Had he been a moron, he would have made no contribution, even if he wanted to.
'quality of life' is wholly subjective. YOU think paris has a high quality of life, I think it's abysmal and wouldn't wish it on an enemy (loss of privacy, substance abuse, ignorant, terrible friends and family, disdain of the masses, does nothing positive with her life, etc).
Again, I'd say Paris' parents fucked her totally. Materialism isn't a good thing. Disconnect from reality isn't a positive influence.
Again and again you talk about things that are 100% subjective as if they had truth beyond your own mind, but they don't. You are in DESPERATE need of subjective awareness.
So based on this you can see where my statement Paris Hilton is "better" than you comes into play. It doesn't matter that you or I are more "intelligent" than Paris, she has other attributes and means that make her "better" than us. Our intelligence is not sufficient to power us past her quality level.
Of course all of this is completely subjective... perhaps you would see an exceptionally intelligent, but illiterate homeless man as equal or better as a human being than Paris Hilton. But I think you would be wrong.
-Max
Sure I can see where it comes into play. You're a shallow, ignorant egoist that can't understand that other people believe or experience anything different than you do.
And you're right, I"m just as bad. I'm an elitist academic prick who WORSHIPS intellect and knowledge the way an evangelical loves Jesus. The difference is that I try not to project my biases...I don't say 'IQ is absolutely correct and meaningful for everyone'...I say it accurately does what it was intended to do and is useful to the people that know what to do with it. You just come out and say it's bullshit. You'd get better mileage just ignoring the topic completely, or qualifying your responses as entirely subjective (ie I have no use for IQ in my life). Trying to apply objective labels based on subjective bias isn't going to accomplish much.