None of that knowledge is really representative of being any "better" at anything.
I don't see how this differs from denying the idea of better, full stop. Half of my secondary school class were better at calculus than me, as measured by our leaving exam. It's a noisy measure but our rankings were related to true mastery of the subject matter.
* Kids with higher IQs will do better under time-constraint. But given as much time as needed, and assuming mastery of previous subjects, IQ is irrelevant.*
Citation needed. I did not really believe that my relatively crap math ability was far above the average until I saw someone spend two hours getting tutored, one one one and still not understand the idea of a vector. I'm sure they could have been trained to mechanically perform an algorithm if they could recognise the class of problem, which is also pretty hard, but they were not going to get it, ever.
I don't see how this differs from denying the idea of better, full stop. Half of my secondary school class were better at calculus than me, as measured by our leaving exam. It's a noisy measure but our rankings were related to true mastery of the subject matter.
* Kids with higher IQs will do better under time-constraint. But given as much time as needed, and assuming mastery of previous subjects, IQ is irrelevant.*
Citation needed. I did not really believe that my relatively crap math ability was far above the average until I saw someone spend two hours getting tutored, one one one and still not understand the idea of a vector. I'm sure they could have been trained to mechanically perform an algorithm if they could recognise the class of problem, which is also pretty hard, but they were not going to get it, ever.