Smarter and dumber. The more you analyze this subject, the more complex and interesting it becomes. -AS
Any more than any other scientific study? I just don't see it.
What's more, the more I read on the topic, the less impressed I am by those writing it:
- He seems to draw no distinction or to skip undiciplined between "g", and "IQ" measures of learning and capacity.
- Does his explanation of the Flynn effect seem a statistical indictment of "g"? It does to me.
- Flynn could have easily put in a table showing the sub-tests and their contribution(s) to the trends, but chooses not to.
