Then we have Binet who originally created the test to identify children who had special needs. And never claimed that it could be used to demonstrate natural intelligence.
Those who came afterwards either misunderstood his work or misrepresented it so they could use it to justify their ideas about racial supremacy. Which were not wholly accurate.
That unfortunately got the practice banned by the new left in service to their ideas about perfect equality.
At any rate, mathematics is a much better proxy for intelligence.
The answers to an IQ test are subjective and unverifiable, resulting in a need to guess what the examiner was thinking when they created it. This contributes to a practice effect where someone who repeatedly solves IQ tests by the same authors will get successively better.
Naturally, it can also serve as a vulgar proxy for intelligence, since one must possess high intelligence to accurately predict another's thought process, if they are quite different from you.
However, a moron can also do well if they happen to be very similar.
The answers to a math question, on the other hand, can be verified by the examinee during the test.
There is no need for guessing.
The only issue is that certain questions can be learned in advance, so the key is to select the questions randomly from thousands of difficult problems. If someone can memorise thousands of challenging solutions then they deserve to be called a genius.
In keeping with your observation that there are fewer female geniuses, there also aren't many female mathematicians.
Finally, the big five and every other personality system is deeply flawed and the qualities are far from orthogonal. It would serve us all much better to abandon the steaming piles of garbage and wipe the slate clean.
This will never happen though, because psychologists are terrible scientists.
IQ tests don't measure intelligence.
They measure one's ability to predict the examiners thought process.
Here is an essay on the statistics surrounding "g": http://bactra.org/weblog/523.html
Then we have Binet who originally created the test to identify children who had special needs. And never claimed that it could be used to demonstrate natural intelligence.
Those who came afterwards either misunderstood his work or misrepresented it so they could use it to justify their ideas about racial supremacy. Which were not wholly accurate.
That unfortunately got the practice banned by the new left in service to their ideas about perfect equality.
At any rate, mathematics is a much better proxy for intelligence.
The answers to an IQ test are subjective and unverifiable, resulting in a need to guess what the examiner was thinking when they created it. This contributes to a practice effect where someone who repeatedly solves IQ tests by the same authors will get successively better.
Naturally, it can also serve as a vulgar proxy for intelligence, since one must possess high intelligence to accurately predict another's thought process, if they are quite different from you.
However, a moron can also do well if they happen to be very similar.
The answers to a math question, on the other hand, can be verified by the examinee during the test.
There is no need for guessing.
The only issue is that certain questions can be learned in advance, so the key is to select the questions randomly from thousands of difficult problems. If someone can memorise thousands of challenging solutions then they deserve to be called a genius.
In keeping with your observation that there are fewer female geniuses, there also aren't many female mathematicians.
Finally, the big five and every other personality system is deeply flawed and the qualities are far from orthogonal. It would serve us all much better to abandon the steaming piles of garbage and wipe the slate clean.
This will never happen though, because psychologists are terrible scientists.