Not done Sir, but doing.

Plenty is doing.

"....Gould's (1981, The Mismeasure of Man) strawman issue of the reification of g was dealt with satisfactorily by the pioneers of factor analysis, including Spearman (1927), Burt (1940) and Thurstone (1947).....From Spearman to Meehl (1991, History of Philosophy & Psychology Bulletin), the consensus of experts is that g need not be a "thing"....The g factor is a construct. Its status as such is comparable to other constructs in science: mass, force, gravitation, potential energy, magnetic field, Mendelian genes, and evolution, to name a few."

A.R.JENSEN & Li-Jen WENG, 1994, 'What is a good g?' Intelligence 18.

Disclaimer: this quote appears here only to spark discussion. It is not endorsed one way or the other. Make up your own mind. Or just refresh the page for another viewpoint. From a collection assembled by the late Chris Brand.