You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Is Social Darwinism the default alternative to Citizen's Income?
Good post.
HOWEVER
A person proven by statistics or testing to be smarter
could also be expected to be more ethical.
Expected by who?
That does not follow.
Does the (empirical data) support the hypothesis?
If you define IQ as being "general intelligence" and being ethical is part of that then it would be expected that if someone is of superior intelligence they should have superior ethics. After all they can see the consequences provided they learn the techniques of predictive statistics.
Otherwise you would have to believe in multiple intelligences and test them specifically on ethics.
You are making some assumptions.
there are others
Does your empirical data support your hypothesis?
I don't personally believe we have a good way to measure general intelligence so I don't believe the test score is accurate to measure it. I do think it measures a certain kind of reasoning ability, and perhaps short term memory.
I would say based on the data I've seen the result is inconclusive with regard to our ability to measure general intelligence and also for the genetic basis as the genes associated with intelligence have not been isolated last I checked. So the hypothetical example was based on the premise that somehow we had conclusive evidence to show a genetic basis for general intelligence and a perfect way of testing it. Under those assumptions then if someone can be shown to truly have superior general intelligence then it would also mean they should be capable of superior ethics. Just as some people are more capable of lifting heavy weights.
It has been said (correctly I think)
that if you can't measure something
then you have no idea what you are talking about.