SOLR
Registered User
That myth is rampant because it's propagated by media and culture. Maths and finance are seen as the epitome of intelligence. But it's not. Trying to understand human behaviour through genetics, epigenetics and neurobiology is far more complex and requires something math-heads often don't have; an understanding of the subtleties of context and the sheer complexity of all the variables involved.
When it comes to complex systems, there's no greater complexity than human behavior and biological development. That's why Robert Sapolsky's bio course ar Stanford has two mandatory readings; his own Why Zebras Don't Get Ulcers and James Gleick's Chaos.
As a scientist, I can say: your post was utter garbage. IQ predicts/correlates with mathematical proficiency and comprehension of any abstract concept nearly perfectly. It is proven by more than 15,000 research papers and it is the most rigorously proven concept in Psychology and Social Sciences.
You've also casually confused the challenges related with the interpretation of behaviours with the skills that lead to the comprehension of abstract concepts, this is highly intellectually reprehensible. Of course, a high IQ helps in understanding the concepts of genetics, epi-genetics and neurobiology. Dah! Predicting behaviours is not settled science, we are barely just getting started, and no, Math-heads (high IQs) won't lack the intelligence to understand the subtleties of all the variables involved. Total, absolute, nonsense. High IQs will be the ones most likely to lead to discoveries in this field like in most others scientific endeavours.
A high IQ doesn't make anyone a better or more valuable human being. It just helps solve abstraction problems.
As much as Id like to predict or speculate on Bergevin's IQ, I don't think it is our place to do that, it can fall into something highly toxic fairly quickly. Let's say that the decision pattern of the management group (not just Bergevin), have created a bad impression thus far.