the best sports players and best musicians I would also suppose were higher IQ on average than normal sports players (I suppose this term means professional athletes) and normal musicians (professional musicians)

In the musicians category I wouldn't be surprised if the best musicians were also smarter than the general population.

In short I think IQ tests are a lousy metric, sure, but it is not a completely useless measure - just nearly useless.

On edit: clarification, fixed wrong capitalization.

The funny thing about specialists is that they can easily embarrass themselves when outside their field.

Watching your average politician talk about technology is a pretty great example of people speaking with zero context. Some of them clearly aren't dumb but they can get in over their heads with ease.

I seriously doubt that, actually. Are they more musically gifted? Sure. Smarter overall? I'm not so sure. It would be an interesting study.

I imagine the ones who are both successful musicians and businesspeople (i.e., they run the business themselves mostly, in addition to being musicians) probably are very intelligent, because that requires a broad range of skills. The ones who are just good at playing an instrument or singing some lyrics that someone else wrote? Not so much.

If you had a specific test like you're after... that would be by definition not general intelligence, but rather some specific intelligence.

Is their world model limited to themselves, their family, their village, their country, their race, their world, their species, their system? Combined with their understanding of social dynamics at each level.

I think the average GenZ in the US is at beginning of global scale, which is great for acceptance of different cultures; but without understanding the social dynamics yet. Giving us “woke” because they understand different cultures have different contexts, this is good but incomplete. E.g. some cultures aren’t aligned with the entire species, like controlling women in a way that leads to bad outcomes as technology adds complexity to our social dynamics.

Measuring this perspective level would help us understand which cultural models work best in adapting with growth and are more likely to be sustainable post-scarcity.

I genuinely don't know why, but you do have to.

It may of course be true where you are.

The DSM does not even suggest an IQ test as part of the diagnostic.

Knowing 6+ people in several states with ADHD diagnoses (some as children, some as adults) none have had anything beyond questions with their physician… or diagnoses by a psychiatrist after starting therapy for a different issue.

https://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/adhd/diagnosis.html

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK519712/table/ch3.t3/

https://add.org/adhd-dsm-5-criteria/

Your anecdote is not data.

Also makes no sense whatsoever as ADHD does not affect IQ in any form. It's a form of dopamine dysregulation, not a learning disability. Let's stop perpetuating this stupid myth.

IQ tests are designed by people that want to create automatons easy to quantify and categorize.

† My definition of intelligence is "ability to solve novel problems." With this definition, an uncontacted tribesperson can be as intelligent as a Nobel prize winner. The difference is education, and the type of problems they're facing, which is just a matter of context.

Once in the UK as a pre/early teen (2003~), and once in Sweden to be rediagnosed via a private company named Modigo (so, now I am not sure if it's standard as part of the healthcare system here).

Since I was 2/2 and that was 100% of my experiences throughout two countries, I thought it was the standard.

It's best administered to children to understand where they are relative to other children and makes little sense in adults.

That's why IQ is age dependent. A 12 year old with a 140 IQ should have the mental pattern matching recognition as a normal 14 year old with 100 IQ.

The standard deviation is based on the next year ups mean IQ and so on.

It doesn't necessarily measure intelligence, but in children it can be used as a proxy for intelligence since usually brain maturity is directly linked to intelligence.

These may not be the highest IQ people, but very few are low IQ (below 90).

A typical IQ score for a mathematics PhD graduate is a couple of standard deviations above the mean.

IQ is correlated with intelligence, and higher intelligence enables greater achievements.

What it the IQ that also dropped to cause the civilization collapse?

As for China, I don't think that one ever "collapsed". It withdrew, but I don't think you can call it a "collapse" the way many other ancient civilizations did. Even Rome is a bit hard to call a full collapse: it degraded over the course of centuries, and eventually Europe turned to feudalism. The Roman Empire itself split apart, with the eastern part (in Constantinople) continuing for another 1000 years after the western side fell apart.

I think civilizations like the Assyrians and Hittites are better examples of civilizations that truly "collapsed": there's basically nothing left of them today, except some ruins.