Can an IQ test be biased?

IQ tests are biased, and have been biased in the past. The most significant assumption (and source of bias) is that intelligence is a single 'thing', which involves nothing but biological components. This rather convenient and random postulate, allows for IQ proponents to ignore experience, as a component of human novelty. This is a questionable assumption, since every useful intellectual production (I.E. invention, idea, theory) throughout history, has been the product of a unique experiences. For example, consider that an entire of chain of Isaac Newtons thoughts, may be related to the experience of the Apple falling on his head. A lot of people in his situation, perhaps with similar IQ, would not have come to produce his ideas, even had they experienced the same event.

Of course, IQ can help to explain a lot of how individuals come to register these experiences, but just as important to IQ, and often more, is factors completely unrelated. Factors like curiOSity (especially through adolescents), motivation, hard work, are just as relevant to generating novel experiences.

The theory behind conventional IQ tests, involves another, perhaps unrelated assumption, that problem solving ability can be measured by a pencil and paper test. But with differences in working memory capacity, there is bound to be IQ independent differences in (best described as) 'real time' problem solving ability. WM capacity is the ability to 'juggle' information through time. This juggling is important, because in the real world we often don't have the time to re-inforce the details of a problem. Once problem relevant information decays from WM capacity, we lose processing opportunities, which may have allowed for generating (time-dependent) novelties. The production of a whole separate class of intellectual products, depends largely on WM capacity, and have long been ignored via the IQ protocol.

Unfortunately, the concept of Intelligence has been monopolized through the decades. The relative handful of 'IQ elite', have imposed theory and laws, which have effectively acted to restrict the definition of intelligence to 'IQ'. The most significant dissent among intellectuals has come from, Stephen Jay Gould, (whose main argument against IQ, is surprisingly similar to my own), the author of Mismeasure of Man. But being only a tautologically valid concept, in a system which is governed by those whom have tautologically succeeded in it, IQ is not bound to change anytime soon, if ever. For now, and perhaps ever, our productions and contributions to the real world, provide a better test of intelligence.