I think that Mr. Cocks oversimplifies matters. Intelligence is important, but so are other things like temperament, physical and mental health, culture, and even looks. I have an IQ sufficient to win a Nobel Prize, but I am deficient in some other areas, so I never even completed a postgraduate degree. Success in life depends on a lot more than IQ.
No argument with what you say. But I believe that Mr. Cocks is correct in that IQ is the foundation for success. Absent the ability to grasp and make use of abstract concepts, success is elusive in an increasingly technology-based society.
I agree with you devere. Mr. Cocks does oversimplify the point, perhaps it is more to make his point understood by many. Like you I have an IQ sufficient to be a doctor. So did my younger brother. In fact, he had a brilliant mind. So much so I was often jealous of his abilities. Mr. Cocks though claims the childhood home bears little influence on adult life, to this point I highly disagree. High IQ children are often permanently harmed in the dysfunctional home, to the point they become so deficient in social skills, they are unable to function at their best and highest levels.
You are correct.
Intellectuals, brilliant as they may be, usually have no more wisdom than anyone else ... and often times what wisdom they do possess is overshadowed by the knowledge of their area of expertise
That is, nothing matters more than their field of expertise which is why "experts" are focused on only one perspective ... and which is why, although "experts" should be consulted for their knowledge, they must never, ever be left to control something as complex as public policy. Doing so results in what America has suffered through for two long years ... and counting.
IQ needs to be defined. In this article it is neither defined nor described.