It seems to me that the correspondent revealed her ignorance of the topic by
referring to the bell curve as a measurement device. It is, of course, the
result of measurement. Should we take her opinion seriously?
Donald McBurney
University of Pittsburgh
Allen Esterson wrote:
> In a letter to the London Times today (26 August) a correspondent writes
> in relation to what she calls �intelligence as measured by the IQ �bell
> curve� �:
>
> �This is well known for its shortcomings, such as its continual
> modification �to serve the ideological commitment of testers� (see
> *Lifelines: Biology, Freedom, Determinism* by Stephen Rose).�
>
> I may be opening a can of worms here, but I�d be interested to know how
> TIPSters would respond to Stephen Rose�s view quoted in this sentence. (I
> leave aside that pots and kettles immediately come to mind in relation to
> Rose�s viewpoint.)
>
> Incidentally, I wish that IQ was discussed in terms of well-constructed IQ
> tests being a measure (albeit imperfect) of *cognitive* intelligence,
> rather than �intelligence�. Any comments on this also welcome!
>
> Interested TIPsters can find the article to which the Times correspondent
> was replying, plus numerous responses, at: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/
> Type IQ in �search this site� box under �Archive� at the top of page.
>
> �Boys are still top dogs� 22 August
>
> �Sex and intelligence� 26 August
>
> Allen Esterson
> Former lecturer, Science Department
> Southwark College, London
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> www.human-nature.com/esterson/index.html
>
> www.butterfliesandwheels.com/articleprint.php?num=10
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
