Depends on who you ask. Many a time did I witness an argument at university between students of psychology (who say they don't measure intelligence) and students of biology / neuroscience who say they do. The general argument against IQ tests is that they don't measure certain types of intelligence, like "artistic" intelligence, and favour problem solving. The counter-argument is that "artistic" intelligence doesn't exist, and that intelligence itself can be defined as a measure of one's ability to solve problems, reason, understand, etc, so IQ tests are perfect for measuring that.
I for one take the view that IQ tests are accurate at measuring intelligence, as long as you take intelligence as reasoning / problem solving / etc. If you don't start calling things like "artistic ability" some form of intelligence, then you are fine. Often, people of extraordinary artistic ability have high IQs anyway, since a form of problem solving is present in the creation of artwork.
If you want to read up more on intelligence, I'd suggest the article on g at Wikipedia.
I for one take the view that IQ tests are accurate at measuring intelligence, as long as you take intelligence as reasoning / problem solving / etc. If you don't start calling things like "artistic ability" some form of intelligence, then you are fine. Often, people of extraordinary artistic ability have high IQs anyway, since a form of problem solving is present in the creation of artwork.
If you want to read up more on intelligence, I'd suggest the article on g at Wikipedia.
