this post was submitted on 08 May 2025
55 points (86.7% liked)
Asklemmy
47937 readers
501 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
IQ is pseudoscience
Only if you're naïve about IQ and worship it like God. Here is wikipedia's second paragraph on IQ:
None of that stands out to me as particularly controversial, certainly not pseudoscience. Emphasis on second sentence -- it's not a concrete measure of intelligence.
Great response.
The assertion that IQ is pseudoscience, is denying reality. While not an exact measure, it correlates with a lot of other measures of flourishing.
But higher IQ doesn't necessarily mean happier, or better in any way.
I know some extremely (academically) intelligent people. Some are arrogant pricks, others are really pleasant, others still are really awkward and difficult to talk to outside their specific interests.
Well yeah, nothing is guaranteed. It's just a correlation -- higher IQ people tend to have more success. More success doesn't necessarily mean happier. But personally, I would take more success if given the option.
ChatGDT said I had a 135 IQ, does that mean I’m also a pseudoscientist?
All psychology is.
Not saying it isn’t useful before a psych major jumps on me. But the entire field is basically explaining how to cope with a society that is hostile to human nature.
The entire field isn't therapy.
That’s about its only useful contribution.
How to learn better? How to organize teams better? How to write text or make presentations so that it aligns with how the brain best receives information? How to evaluate candidates for a role while minimizing the halo effect and the bandwagon effect? How to nudge people into leaving public spaces cleaner? How to make spaces more attractive for people to spend time in? How to increase adherence to lifestyle changes such as diet and exercise after cancer treatment? How to increase the odds of achieving a task you want to do? How to make computer interfaces easier to use for people, including people with disabilities? You’re saying that psychology has not studied these nor contributed to them?
Yes, there are a lot of problems in the field. But there are also brilliant people cutting through the bullshit and using their findings to improve the world. I’d be more than happy to show you robust findings that the field has gifted the world.