You are not contradicting what I'm saying, other than to assert that a test of a construct's success, defines success. While I'm saying pretty much... 'there is more than one way to skin a cat'. You are again using subjective terms like meaningful to define validity. Does changing the test, change the outcome of the result?
What I'm saying, is that intelligence is not a sport defined by a rule set. What if the basket is 2 feet off the ground and the field was 3 times as long. Still going Kareem Abdul Jabar over that 5'2 girl? Intelligence isn't a sport, your ability to put the ball in the basket, is not defined by the height of the basket.What I think is touchy feely is dancing around the really obvious differences in ability that people have. People with lower innate ability don't fail to learn incredibly difficult concepts because they're "lazy", but because it's actually just beyond their abilities. This really is like telling a 5'2" girl that the only reason she can't play in the NBA is that she didn't put in the necessary work.
I need you to explain, how my comment that Felps and Bolt are going at the same speed, while one is swimming and the other is running... has anything remotely to do with 5'2 girls playing in NBA? How would my answer be that she needs to practice and not change the sport? Your judgment is being clouded for some need to worry about being touchy feely.
- - - Updated - - -
Case and point...
(Just saying you'd be better at math if you had a better teacher and/or cared. )