From a couple readers:

Dear Jonah, Murray’s statement about “g” is hardly without controversy in the field. As a psychologist who teaches intellectual assessment (and does a fair amount of it), I’d say that Murray suggests that “g” is very well established. Well, the evidence for multiple intelligences tends to be advancing, not receding. That doesn’t mean he isn’t on to something in his thesis. He is right (I reckon) that vocational schooling could be better for many folks than attending college is. He is simply trying to let “g” carry too much water, however.

And:

I’m a foster parent, and I’ve had about 200 kids pass through my hallowed halls.Some are smarter than others, period. While there is some degree of specialization, intellectual aptitudes are not so orthogonal that a kid who could someday read Caesar and Thucydides in their originals might never get long division, or that a kid who might solve partial differential equations might never reliably make subject and verb agree in number. Intelligence is not as separable into independent realms as a lot of people would like to believe.