<p>
</p>
<p>Actually, the source I quoted actually does make this argument, and it actually is true that a lot of the early proponents of the IQ score had ulterior motives, particularly racial motives.</p>
<p>I would also argue that, while IQ is certainly genetic, it is impacted just as much by socioeconomic status as genetics are, or at least access to education, which has a strong correlation with socioeconomic status. If IQ tests had a way to test actual intelligence that didn’t reflect in any way a person’s prior experiences, then yes, I would say they are not biased and not affected by any socioeconomic issues, but as it stands now, try as they might, IQ tests do have biases towards the educated and therefore do not really accurately portray some innate trait we call intelligence, and more accurately represent a mix of this intelligence with education.</p>
<p>There is a reason that the average IQ scores at inner city public schools are generally lower than at private academies - or even suburban public schools - and that reason is not genetic or racial or anything else like that, it is socioeconomic. If IQ was truly measuring pure, innate intelligence, then it would not have such biases.</p>