Blog commenter Lion of the Judah-sphere has claimed that the SAT does not correlate as well with comprehensive IQ tests as said IQ tests correlate with one another. At first I assumed he was wrong, but my recent analysis suggesting Harvard undergrads have an average Wechsler IQ of 122, really makes me wonder.
While an IQ of 122 (white norms) is 25 points above the U.S. mean of 97, it seems very low for a group of people who averaged 1490 out of 1600 on the SAT. According to my formula, since 1995 a score of 1490 on the SAT equated to an IQ of 141. But my formula was based on modern U.S. norms; because demographic changes have made the U.S. mean IQ 3 points below the white American mean (and made the U.S. standard deviation 3.4 percent larger than the white SD), converting to white norms reduces Harvard’s SAT IQ equivalent to 139.
In addition, the SAT IQ equivalents were based on a scale where institutionalized retardates, the brain damaged, and the mentally ill, were part of the bell curve. Such people are excluded from the norming of the Wechsler IQ scale, and since such people drag the bell curve to the left by 2 IQ points, excluding them from the norms would change the SAT IQ equivalent of Harvard students from 139 to about 137 (40 IQ points above the U.S. mean of 97).
Thus, Harvard students, largely selected based on SAT scores, are 40 IQ points above average as measured by the SAT, but “only” 25 points above average as measured by the Wechsler. This suggests the SAT and the Wechsler only correlate 0.63 (25/40), which is far lower than the 0.88 correlation between the Wechsler and the Stanford-Binet (the two gold standards of IQ testing).
Of course the average Harvard student is not selected exclusively on SAT scores so she might not be cognitively representative of the average 1490 SAT young adult. If she is significantly smarter or dumber, that would have skewed my estimate.
In general, research correlating the SAT with IQ has been inconsistent, with correlations ranging from 0.4 to 0.8. I think much depends on the sample. Among people who took similar courses in similar high schools, the SAT is probably an excellent measure of IQ. But considering the wide range of schools and courses American teenagers have experienced, the SAT is not, in my judgement, a valid measure of IQ. Nor should it be. Universities should not be selecting students based on biological ability, but rather on acquired academic skills.
In addition, the SAT IQ equivalents were based on a scale where institutionalized retardates, the brain damaged, and the mentally ill, were part of the bell curve.
Really?
Universities should not be selecting students based on biological ability, but rather on acquired academic skills.
The contradiction with that statement is that acquired academic skills are also highly biological. Some people seek out more stimulating intellectual experiences despite their school education. The SAT is probably more dependent on this trait and others like it like conscientiousness than a purer test of g, but it’s nonetheless biological. But colleges probably prefer a test of both IQ and personality traits (like the SAT) rather than a pure IQ test because it somewhat minimizes class differences (which, I know, is the exact opposite of what you believe). It makes the SAT less of a measure of raw intellectual talent, but a good measure of future academic success and other traits that universities like. I think this is true despite the fact the SAT over-predicts future success for blacks and under-predicts it for Asians. It seems blacks over-prep for the SAT to make up for a lack of g and conscientiousness, while Asians work hard and do better in college than their SAT scores would predict (even though they have a reputation for cheating and prepping on tests). But it still seems the a non-g component of the SAT is measuring something related to conscientiousness, or maybe grit or something.
Moreover, I think the current SAT benefits working class whites more than rich whites with higher g (which contradicts a common HBD notion that white elites hate, hate, hate working class whites from flyover America. The SAT actually benefits them).
My comment is incredibly speculative, I know. But there’s a reason they have made the SAT less g-loaded over the years.
I think the SAT measures the same thing school grades do (IQ + conscientiousness, as you say); indeed the 0.63 correlation between SAT and IQ I estimate for America as a whole (if everyone stayed in high school long enough to take it) is roughly the same as the 0.65 correlation between IQ and grades in elementary school (when virtually everyone is in school so there’s no range restriction)
The SAT does gives lower class people of any race the chance to prove themselves to elite colleges, but because low SES kids attend schools that discourage them from attending college, they don’t take many math courses & thus are probably less prepared for the SAT.
Really?
What I meant by that is it’s assumed by Charles Murray & others that if you score in the top 0.3% of SAT takers, your SAT is in the top 0.1% of the general population (if everyone were tested) because only 1/3 American 17 year-olds take it, yet virtually 100% of brilliant 17 year-olds are thought to take it, thus high SAT scores are not just above other SAT takers, but are above all 17 year-olds if all 17-year-olds took the test.
However tests like the WAIS-R do not assigned IQs based on how you rank with all Americans your age, but with all “normal” Americans your age. People with brain damage, severe emotional problems & institutional retardates are excluded, among others, are excluded from the norms.
It doesn’t make a huge difference, but it’s an example of the inconsistency that occurs in IQ research
what part of the SAT could possibly pertain to personality traits?
I believe the verbal and writing sections are testing conscientiousness and to a lesser extent, openness to experience
And also the simple desire to do well on high-stakes tests, which is somewhat separate from conscientiousness, but probably important for success in college.
Another thing you have to take into account is that the officially reported SAT score ranges are not single sitting. Back when I took it they only looked at your highest score on each section. Nowadays I think they also allow you to send in your best single sitting. Harvard students on average take the SAT 2 times so the reported score ranges probably overstate their actual ability by about 50 points.
Universities should not be selecting students based on biological ability, but rather on acquired academic skills.
but biological ability applies to academic skills. Elite universities want people who can learn quickly and have good critical thinking skills, both of which necessitate a high IQ.
pp hates blacks and mexicans, buthe loves kikes.
why?
is he afraid of them?
is it that they’re short and hairy and f-ugly.
the former most likely.
pp hosts an extreme racist blog, but jews are off limits, because unlike blacks jews have power, and pp fears them.
I actually like black people. The blog has celebrated so many black people that both you and Santoculto thought I was black (Santoculto still does)
But I believe nature created an ancient immutable hierarchy of the races: Mongolids > Caucasoids > Negroids, and it’s a beautiful thing.
Vive La Difference!
With respect to Mexicans and peoples of Ashkenazi ancestry, they’re both outliers (Mexicans have low IQs for hybridized Mongoloids & Ashkenazis have high IQs for Caucasoids; neither fit neatly into Rushton’s hierarchy).
the judenfrage is at the very heart of why HBD does not and cannot explain differences in social outcomes.
yet it is systematically ignored by HBDers.
that they are content with such asinine explanations as jews are cleverer than we goyim can only be explained by:
1. HBDers are idiots.
2. HBDers are afraid to talk about jews but are perfectly content to talk about blacks and mexicans and chinamen and whatever.
it’s absurd.
rushtons theories are highly simplistic and reductive.
rushtons theories are highly simplistic and reductive.
They’re parsimonious; elegant. Rushton was the king of Occam’s razor.
Jorge/Mugabe, most HBDers explain Jewish success as just a function of their high IQ which is not high enough to explain success of that magnitude.
A few argue Ashkenazis have other genetic traits, in addition to IQ, that cause their success, but such theories are rare & controversial, even among HBDers.
In fantasyland, maybe. He completely misapplied r/k selection theory and cherry-picked data. But those are never problems for true believers.
it is, unfortunately perhaps, quite obvious that the mean verbal IQ of NE Asians is no higher than that of Europeans.
this is obvious in NE Asians who’ve been in Western Europe or its diaspora for generations, not to mention the IQ test evidence and the genuinely juvenile nature of NE Asian “high” literature. the E Indians, perhaps for racial reasons, leave the NE Asians in the dust.
it could be that their mean is the same but their sd is smaller.
whatever.
the most verbally gifted people are all European and after them are the jews. this even shows up in Jeopardy’s best. jennings and rutter are both goys. and the one guy to beat Watson is a Quaker like Nixon.
and on one of my many hobby horses…
it’s also quite obvious from the historical record…
until the haskalah the sum of jewish literature was less than a drop in the bucket compared to that of the Greeks and the Romans even considering the relatively small numbers of jews, and most of that was collective rather than the work of individual authors like Maimonides and Spinoza.
afaik i’m the only one on these hbd sites to remark that the whole Talumud which was composed over seven centuries by hundreds of authors is surpassed by one of many works by an italian gentile who died before he was 50.
namely, the Summa is as long as and more sophisticated than the talmud.
the ridiculous level of jewish accomnplishment in the last 100 years is…
RIDICULOUS!!!
no one would have predicted it 300 years ago or earlier.
and what makes the hereditist/cockring explanation of ashkenazi jewish accomplishment even more ridiculous is that…
Maimonides and Spinoza were Sephardic jews.
in fact Maimonides’s most famous work, Guide to the Perplexed, was written in Arabic as Maimonides lived in Moorish Spain when he wrote it.
of course the Jews were expelled from Spain in 1492…and (coincidentally???) Spain discoverd the New World and was…in the following century, the richest and most powerful country on earth.
Ashkenazi Jews occupied a different social niche from their European hosts, and that is where any selective effect must have operated, the Utah researchers say. From A.D. 800, when the Ashkenazi presence in Europe is first recorded, to about 1700, Ashkenazi Jews held a restricted range of occupations, which required considerable intellectual acumen. In France, most were moneylenders by A.D. 1100. Expelled from France in 1394, and from parts of Germany in the 15th century, they moved eastward and were employed by Polish rulers first as moneylenders and then as agents who paid a large tax to a noble and then tried to collect the amount, at a profit, from the peasantry. After 1700, the occupational restrictions on Jews were eased.
As to how the disease mutations might affect intelligence, the Utah researchers cite evidence that the sphingolipid disorders promote the growth and interconnection of brain cells. Mutations in the DNA repair genes, involved in second cluster of Ashkenazic diseases, may also unleash growth of neurons.
In describing what they see as the result of the Ashkenazic mutations, the researchers cite the fact that Ashkenazi Jews make up 3 percent of the American population but won 27 percent of its Nobel prizes, and account for more than half of world chess champions.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/03/science/03gene.html?pagewanted=2&_r=0
yeah pp. i get all the bullshit explanations of HBDers, that is, jew cock suckers.
why doesn’t the same bullshit obtain today for previously un-accomplished groups like the jews used to be? how do you know that today’s Nigerians aren’t like yesterday’s Jews?
easy. you DON’T!!!
it’s all IDEOLOGY.
the jews are powerful today. especially in the bullshit joke American media.
one sees this vis-a-vis E Indian and NE Asian “high” literature. Buddhism is Indian. so far as NE Asians have ANY philosophy at all, it’s just commentary on that of the E Indians. Confucius and the mythical Lao-tzu were fucktards. have you read the Analects? they, like all NE Asian “high” literature, is…
JUVENILE.
I think Cochran’s point is the modern Ashkenazi didn’t genetically exist until 1700 (concluding 900 years of intense selection)…so their earlier unaccomplishments don’t debunk his theory
or i guess “Analects” is plural so they ARE juvenile.
in Shit-merica:
one is ALLOWED to question the motives of the rich per se, as their motives are different from those of everyone else because they are rich.
if 10 out of 10 top landlords in Manhattan in sq ft were Nigerians or Chinese or even Quakers…
THAT WOULD BE A PROBLEM.
and it’s the same problem for the Chinese in SE Asia and the E Indians in E Africa and the un-mixed Europeans in Latin America and S. Africa…
when the Tanzanian army threw Idi Amin out of Uganda, the natives CHEERED.
what was the ONE THING they cheered Idi for?
WHEN HE EXPELLED THE E INDIANS.
the bottom line:
HBDERS ARE IMPRISONED WITHIN A NEW WORLD, MULTI-ETHNIC STATE WAY OF THINKING, EVEN WHEN THEY’RE FROM OLD EUROPE.
SO THEY MUST RANK THE RACES OF MAN RATHER THAN ADVOCATE FOR AN ETHNO-STATE AS A GOOD IN ITSELF/PER SE IRRESPECTIVE OF ANY ABSOLUTE RANK.
BLUT UND BODEN THEY’VE NEVER HEARD OF.
THEY’RE FAGS….
UNCLE SAM FUCKS THEM IN THE ASS AND THEY THANK HIM FOR IT.
on HBD jew cock suckers:
SO THEY MUST RANK THE RACES OF MAN RATHER THAN ADVOCATE FOR AN ETHNO-STATE AS A GOOD IN ITSELF/PER SE IRRESPECTIVE OF ANY ABSOLUTE RANK.
It sounds like you’re angry that HBDers don’t promote your pet political preferences. That’s not really our role. Science should not be driven by political agendas (liberal, conservative, or libertarian)
and even more they’re imprisoned within an un-aesthetic, “financial calculus” way of thinking.
whoever understands wagner, understands national socialism.
naht euch dem lande…
naht euch dem strande…
hitler cannot be understood as anything other than an artist.
vive la in-difference!!!
vive la difference!!!
america is ungovernable. those who fought the revolution have plowed the sea.
Jorge Videla/Robert Mugabe sounds loony.
‘mer’can gentile libertardians and conventional conservatards (but NOT paleocons) are on the BLUE PILL…and on the rag…
ALL of the evidence points to ethnicity as a much stronger factor in determining per capita GDP than economic system or form of government.
the only possible exception is N Korea.
INTER ALIA…
Cuba is one of Latin America’s whitest countries and is as rich as or richer than, even after 55 years of Communism, ANY less white Latin American country.
Scandinavia has the highest taxes as % of GDP and the highest % of workers in government in the developed world and yet it makes the more laissez faire UK…
LOOK LIKE SHIT.
AS DOES EVERY OTHER GERMANIC LANGUAGE SPEAKING COUNTRY IN EUROPE.
TAKE THE FUCKING RED PILL.
Jorge Videla/Robert Mugabe sounds loony.
Yeah, I used to think he was autistic, but autistics are almost never antisemites. Racists yes, antisemites no. Antisemitism requires cynicism & autistics tend to be naive.
But dude is obviously mentally ill. Schizophrenic perhaps? Seems too coherent, but then maybe he’s one of those rare high IQ schizophrenics. Or maybe he’s one of those rare socially aware autistics.
That’s not really our role.
EGI is a political concept.
by loony i think you mean drunk.
you should read Table Talk Blasian.
all human behavior occurs within a poilitical context. psychologists, even social psychologists, sytematically IGNORE politics and social class and thus are merely commisars/ideologists.
John Dewey said:
if hitler is crazy, then he’s crazy like a fox.
you Blasian are a self-hating black man.
or maybe you Blasian are one of those very common stupid black guys.
and besides i’m not an anti-semite, whatever that is.
i’m a democrat.
and when the rich and powerful don’t look like the people they govern and employ, that’s BAD.
He’s not schizophrenic. LOL!
But he has obsessive compulsive traits combined with a lack of impulse control, probably because he posts drunk.
The OCD probably caused the alcoholism which probably caused or exasperated the impulsivity; hopefully no permanent damage.
dear God pp is FUCKTARDED.
HBD is a pseudoscience for idiots…aka people who think psychology and psychiatry are sciences.
the one psychiatrist i saw…at my own “invitation”…said
1. no psychosis
2. no mania
3. whatever OCD like traits did NOT amount to a disorder…like Jerry Seinfeld.
4. BUT i was 6 sds to the right (or left) in CYNICISM.
AND HE WAS RIGHT!!!
Diogenes of SInope is my HERO.
it takes social/emotional intelligence to be always a self-improtant, narcissistic, ornery cuss.
despite the bullshit…very high IQ people so far as they “fail to achieve their potential”…fail because they are also socially super intelligent…not the opposite.
as i’ve said so many times…
not only do stupid people not know they’re stupid, BUT
they think that their cognitive betters are stupid.
the single most socially intelligent character in all fiction is House MD!!!
to be socialized actually requires that you be not very smart socially.
europe’s HBDers focus on immigration.
for them the problem is that the immigrants, however selected, are absolutely inferior…
this is uncle sam’s/the jews’ cock in their ass.
the problem IS that the immigrants AREN’T co-ethnics…
THAT’S THE PROBLEM.
but ‘mer’castan has so framed the “debate” that euro-HBDers can’t see this.
‘mer’castan exports the flat earth ideology.
the whole world must be like ‘mer’castan.
Dude,
Mel Gibson also tried to blame his rant about Jews on the fact that he was drunk
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jPQjHiVaDmE
“dude”
you’re socially retarded.
gibson isn’t an alcoholic any more than i am…probably less…but he, UNLIKE you, KNOWS that…
“alcoholism”
is…
sale-able in the jew media…
because jewish alcoholics are so rare and jews associate drinking “to excess” with goyim.
gibson and his father (a Jeopardy champion btw)…
are paleo-cons…
like me!
I love big booty and I fuck videla/mugabe mother
200 IQ
High testo
Blasian superiority #norage
Hey Pumpkin, I had a thought. If swank and mugabe deny that IQ is both heritable and different in population due to natural selection, does this new evidence that Dutch height being due to natural selection, and the fact that height is heritable as IQ, prove them wrong http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/09/science/natural-selection-may-help-account-for-dutch-height-advantage.html ?
Neither of us deny that IQ is heritable, and indeed, the assertion that most, if not all, behaviors are heritable is meaningless.
And no, that study wouldn’t prove us wrong. You have a study discussing a recent phenomenon that essentially favors tall men by not that much and not after a certain point. So in a generation or two, you would still expect the h^2 to be high.
height is much more heritable than IQ fucktard.
That’s wrong
http://www.larspenke.eu/pdfs/Arslan%20&%20Penke%20in%20press%20-%20Zeroing%20in%20on%20the%20genetics%20of%20intelligence.pdf
http://www.nature.com/mp/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/mp201537a.html
To say it’s heritable is to say it’s genetic, and we have plenty evience of the genes because GWAS and GCTA
what “we” have “plenty of evidence of” Kev is that you’re stupid.
If you say that “heritability is useless” the you have proven your own stupidity. If that’s even true, then how can you explain these papers 😉
as swank has said/adumbrated/suggested…
that whatever trait is heritable is by itself meaningless regarding an independent effect of genes on the trait unless the heritability is for a global population randomly selected…and behavior geneticists are too fucking stupid to do what would be a fairly dispositive study.
Difference in disease susceptibility between races are heritable and due to natural selection: https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2015/04/14/born-that-way/
Did Kate get banned?
I’m around. Just been revising a paper so that it meets peer review before the April 25 submission deadline. Of course had they understood the paper in the first place, there would be no need for revisions.
I love my job but it can be tedious.
and when the rich and powerful don’t look like the people they govern and employ, that’s BAD….
Correct, which is the current state of affairs of the Anglo Cessprole Sphere.
When you have a society based on race, connections, specific school affiliations, a combination to this to be part of the elite and well to do, where the commoners are nothing of this sort, that’s a dangerous path to be taken.
exactly right.
hear! hear!
mega dittos.
amy chua is married to a jew yet she makes exactly this point en passant in World on Fire…
namely, in a mutli-ethnic state, libertarianism/neo-liberalism and anti-government sentiment generally…
flourish…
because there is no fellow-feeling or “but for the grace of God there go i” sentiment in a heterogeneous society.
when a poor spaniard says, “i am a spaniard!”
it has infinitely more force than when a poor black american says, “i’m an american!”
because there is such a thing as a spaniard.
but there is no such thing as an american.
would there be Norwegian HBDers if Norway had no immigrants?
NO!
would africa’s former colonies be better off if their borders were ethnic? (believe it or not not all SSAs are the same.)
YES!
when the rich and powerful look like the poor and impotent is there more social spending and less suffering?
YES!
america is ungovernable. those who fought the revolution have plowed the sea.
hey i still have one beer left!
and if you think i’m crazy try this:
here of course…
it must be said for the socially retarded…
Reed is making fun of Letterman…not the reverse!
talk about genetic deficiency…isn’t that pitiful…
in prole ‘mer’castan everyone is a snob, because eveyone is a prole.
its whites must distance themselves from their pitiful co-ethnics as much as from niggers.
i’m lost…
i could play all day with that guy.
Ameriprole, Anglo Prole or Anglo Cessprole, Angryprole, Mercanprole, as Shakespeare would say, a piece of turd by any other name, would be the same!
And the word cess as in cesspool, also means British. How fitting!
still “Blasian” and “Kate”
CAN’T
answer my VERY simple question.
yet they keep posting as if they had IQs greater than 70.
here it is again:
how did i calculate h^2 for my example?
of course Blasian is so fucktarded he thought he’d answered but hadn’t
http://www.aei.org/publication/in-todays-social-science-wishing-makes-it-so/
swank and mugabe don’t even have the evidence to contradict this simple statement of facts on this article.
And what about this research vindicating not only the correlation of IQ with brain size, but also correlation of IQ with SES?
http://t.co/IkUFm8PgPg
Why do poor kids have smaller brains AND smaller IQs?
Brain size increases with learning a new language
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22750568
Playing video games increases brain size
http://www.mpg.de/7588840/video-games-brain%20
Learning an instrument may increase brain size
http://www.musicianbrain.com/papers/Schlaug_CorpusCallosum_Children_Music_nyas_04842.pdf
Allegedly tai chi can increase brain size
http://americannutritionassociation.org/newsletter/tai-chi-increases-brain-size
Juggling increases brain size
http://www.nature.com/neuro/journal/v12/n11/full/nn.2412.html
And learning these skills may translate to improved mental abilities:
http://www.spring.org.uk/2013/07/the-mental-benefits-of-useless-skills-like-juggling.php
I’d be surprised if any of those activities increased overall brain size by even half a standard deviation.
Maybe, but to co-opt a popular HBD refrain: it could be many activities of small effect.
Charles Murray, on heritability: “”When I – when we – say 60 percent heritability, it’s not 60 percent of the variation. It is 60 percent of the IQ in any given person.”
1 is misstated. Gould was referring to brain size assessed via cranial circumference, and the correlation between brain size and IQ ranges between .3-.4. Further there’s some evidence that suggests that the difference in brain size arises from a particular individual attempting to learn new tasks, i.e. those who have attempted more will learn more.
2. is meaningless and a strawman.
3. Meaningless.
4. is also silly. Occam’s razor doesn’t favor Murray’s intended explanation because of the confounds in 1.
*cranial capacity
dear God. did Murray really say that?
he’s even dumber than i thought.
Yes, he did. Just like Rushton applied r/k selection theory before he understood r/k selection theory.
Gee, I wonder why…
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22750568
The brain is malleable but there was an overall increase in brain volume, an increase in localized. That’s what I did.
If I start to study other languages, it is likely that the same will happen to my brain, but this will not increase my intelligence genotype. And it is noteworthy that many languages have similarities. When you force more a certain part of the brain, if it has favorable physiological conditions, it is likely that there is an increase located in this region, just as a result of this effort.
http://www.mpg.de/7588840/video-games-brain%20
Iq = testing people who score high on cognitive tests are smart in solving test questions and not being ‘completely’ ‘smart. This is the typical leftist argument about what the cognitive tests measure.
The same for the Super Mario *** I became very good at Super Mario Kart, after losing several times for my brother. If a schizophrenic of average intelligence, after several practices of Super Mario, become smarter and this new intelligence in the long term is sustained, then your premise through this link is potentially correct.
Other complementar explanation. Typical case of correlation than causation. Gamers tend to be spatially smarter than non-gamers.
I will not comment the other links. You are despised very likely predispositions of the groups that showed. Doing yoga does not increase intelligence, but can reorganize the brain locally increasing the parts relating to this type of mental exercise.
Gamers tend to be spatially smarter than non-gamers.
Their brain sizes increased after they played the games consistently, compared to a control group.
But the rest is just you repeating your priors re: how fixed intelligence is.
I believe more research is warranted to flesh out the links. Maybe you’re right, and it’s all just fixed and the increases don’t have any effect on intelligence or any mental ability. But I don’t think you can make that conclusion right now. And I’m not concluding that it necessarily swings the other way either. The only point was to show that it’s more complicated than Murray makes it out to be.
Well, I think I can conclude now, even if it was wrong, because it seems so obvious, although I agree with you that the way the hbds tend to make their conclusions, tends to give without added complexity. Remember, it is always more complex. However, do not mean you have to be complicated. =)
It seems so obvious because you have found a way to explain the observed phenomenon with your priors, but that’s not quite the same as demonstrating that link in reality.
there was one section of einstein’s brain which was notably hypertrophied. but only one.
what was that?
the part of his brain which controlled his right hand…he was a violin player!
The brain is malleable but there wasN’T overall increase in brain volume, but localized increase.
Only self-projection. “Its” science is “real” science, “our” science is a obscure XIX century pseudo-science.
My “priorities” are fundamentally personal. “Its” priorities are linked with reality. You are a genius. We are pedanticaly intelectual ones. Who can understand you??
Most hbds are Alphas and Betas. But few them (seems) are like Bernard Marx and The Savage.
Most HBDs are very conscientious and socially intelligent.
”conscientious” is different than aware. Yes, i no doubt about social intelligence of most hbd’s. i doubt about real emotional intelligence.
Pingback: Respected blogger responds to my post about Harvard, SATs & IQ | Pumpkin Person