In response to my little post on "the invisible IQ test", Andrew wrote:
"Sometimes I think it's the opposite--people devalue what they know how to do because, to them, it's so "obvious." For example, Caroline has sometimes helped me with teaching issues (such as working with students on ideas for projects). When I thank C for the help, she typically says that she didn't do anything. She actually did a lot but she's such an expert in teaching and in drawing information out from people, that she doesn't realize how difficult it is for me."
I think just because "people devalue what they know" and tend to think it is easy, they will tend to think low of those who do not know how to do it. The "invisible IQ test" I was thinking was not formulated by values but rather by necessity and some kind of definition of basics.
For example, a professional figure skater will regard some of her moves as basics, nothing to be "proud" of, which will be very difficult for us to do. She will of course devalue such moves but will think anyone who can not do such moves is nothing like a figure skater. Of course, I don't think she will include things that are so advanced and specific into her "invisible IQ test".