>One could score lower than 83 and be perfectly capable to perform their duties
I do not know how well the ASVAB correlates with IQ, but you mixed up IQ and percentile. IQ is a normal distribution (basically a bell curve) with a mean of 100 and 15 or 16 point standard deviations. Percentile is just a measurement of how something ranks out of a total where the total is divided into 100 equal groups. Just assuming that ASVAB correlates perfectly with IQ, a score of 83 on the ASVAB would correlate with a 115 or 116 IQ. That's about the average intelligence of a graduate student. An 83 IQ would correlate with an ASVAB score of 12-14.
The absolute minimum score to get into the Air Force and Navy is 36 and 35 respectively. Applicants scoring below 50 are rejected if they don't have a GED. You most likely cannot join the military if you have an IQ of 83. That is assuming ASVAB and IQ are directly correlated, which is probably not true. But, since IQ correlates with academic success and the ASVAB correlates with academic success, there is undoubtedly a moderate correlation sufficient enough for this undertaking.https://www.iqcomparisonsite.com/iqtable.aspx
The Army found there is NOTHING you can do with an 83 IQ that is more productive than unproductive.
>inherent flaws and biases
there are always flaws and biases in science. those few instances don't invalidate the entire metric which is accepted as accurate by psychologists. the perfect measure does not exist.
>we did a lot of messed up and incorrect things back in the 20's
>For instance, a person could be very intelligent in the arts, athletics, theories on the existence of man, etc. Where on an IQ test are those graded?
All of the multiple intelligence abilities correlate with IQ; that is to say that IQ correlates with artistic ability, musical ability, and what is classically regarded as intelligence - crystallized and fluid intelligence. What presupposes intelligence is controversial but we generally see intelligence as a single measurement - and it would be most useful to regard it as such. JPB supposes intelligence is "that which gets you far in life" or "that which predicts for success in everything in life from middle school, high school, university, and job success". IQ is the single best determining factor for all of those things. It's unlikely that someone would be competent in the arts yet possess a weak philosophical mind. And it's unlikely that someone who is extremely successful in life also possesses a weak mind for the arts and philosophy. Indeed some people are better in technical fields but the single greatest predicting factor for what is generally regarded as intelligence - that which gets you far, essentially - is IQ. A high IQ implies great potential in all or most academic fields and job success.
Athletic ability and personality type (such as "emotional intelligence" i.e. extroversion and agreeableness) cannot be regarded as manifestations of intelligence. Then you would have to say that someone who is physically weak or introverted yet has an IQ of 145 is not intelligent.
Source on IQ being a greater predictor for overall success than any single component:https://youtu.be/jSo5v5t4OQM?t=9m57s
Edited 4/30/2018 05:38:45