Originally Posted by JJsMom
This reminds me of that age old question - which came first, the chicken or the egg?

So which came first, the brains or the money? I think strong arguments can be made on both sides of that one. Obviously wealthier nations have access to more educational resources than poorer nations, but there also had to be a beginning to the wealth, right? And if you are smart, and you live in a poor nation (or state if you break it down in the US alone), do you move to a wealthier one for the job and/or resources? So is it the nation being wealthy that causes it to be smarter or the people who are smart moving there for its resources?

Then there's the whole nature vs nurture argument added to the mix. But that's another thread. wink
Exactly. I personally see IQ tests of being somewhat useful, but not an indication of intelligence. IQ tests and the whole nature vs nurture argument would make an interesting thread.

The tests are designed by the very people who educate and evaluate our skills. Degrees are then handed out to the people who fit into the system's test methodologies. Most of those who work in the various valued professions are choosen based on those degrees.

None of this necessarily proves the best people are working in the professions we as a society value. The system may appear to work, but without anything to compare it with, how do we know it is working anywhere near as good as it could. A sort of self fulfilling prophecy.