While I'm certainly willing to accept that "EQ" is unscientific claptrap, coming at this from outside the apparent controversy, this answer is off-putting to me partially because I don't have the context this author assumes (a context which includes enough technical jargon and name drops to make me wonder who exactly this response is written _for_, as presumably academic psychologists are not pursuing professional discourse via Quora).
All that said, his slavish devotion to "IQ is king" makes me seriously question the value of attempting to pursue understanding his point. IQ may well strongly correlate to societally normative positive outcomes, but elevating a single quantitative measure to this degree reveals a worryingly inhuman approach to the field.
I would not want to discuss my health with a doctor who ranted like this about BMI being the most important measure of health we have. And I don't really want to learn about the psychological aspects of emotional health and human interaction from someone who rants this angrily over the transcendent value of reducing human mental capacity to a number, either.
All that said, his slavish devotion to "IQ is king" makes me seriously question the value of attempting to pursue understanding his point. IQ may well strongly correlate to societally normative positive outcomes, but elevating a single quantitative measure to this degree reveals a worryingly inhuman approach to the field.
I would not want to discuss my health with a doctor who ranted like this about BMI being the most important measure of health we have. And I don't really want to learn about the psychological aspects of emotional health and human interaction from someone who rants this angrily over the transcendent value of reducing human mental capacity to a number, either.