since technology solve it all, technology memorize for us, technology do many things for us, and in the future, robots will do things for us, even surgeries for us, and the more we advance in technology, the technology do more for us,intill we wan't need to do anything. does this mean that the technology, will replace all what are we doing today one day? for today, we may think we are smarter than people in past, that they didnt have technology they always have to find some ideas to help them, well i'm thinking that WE are smarter, but, will we be smarter in the future? or we will just give up our need to be smarter since technology will all be automatic and it will all serve us while we are enjoying the wonderfull weather? well, that's if we reached that day, i mean, in this century, we still have plenty of global desasters, from weather changement sea level rising, so + huricanes, earth quackes, etcetc etc...
Most things, not all. Personally i would want a top notch robot doing surgery on me as opposed to a human. Of course they didn't have the technology then. Did they need it? One could argue that we don't need it now but we humans like to be entertained, yes? Yes we will be smarter in the future, that's evolution for you. There always has been natural disasters. The human race pulls through, survival of the fittest. Even if we don't reach that day, i'll be long gone by then Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
In terms of straight IQ measurements, humanity (at least in the West) is getting smarter and smarter. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn_effect Longer term we will be able to manipulate our own genome. An obvious change to make is to increase everyone's smarts. So I predict that in 100 years, people will be a lot smarter, and in 200 years, even smarter still.
Do you mean dumber and dumber? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Or is this a qualifier form of the noun dummy? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
I was going to say something about spell check, but chose to bite my fingers to stop them from typing it out. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Longer term we will be able to manipulate our own genome. An obvious change to make is to increase everyone's smarts. So I predict that in 100 years, people will be a lot smarter, and in 200 years, even smarter still.[/QUOTE] genetic experiments on humans is illegal so that needs to change first. so if you can create a smarter human then why stop there. you could make ppl less intelligent and dumbed down servants that wont ask for payment for work or wont revolt against its ruling class. the ethical reason to support doing this is to say "theyre not fully human" or "they arent aware of their situation". i know my view on this is flawed and i do support eugenics to better us but there is unforseen consequences if we go ahead with genetic experiments. (tried to quote a comment and i didnt want its url link in my comment, lol.
Those with to power can make a very well run education system, better TV quality and a host of other issues that directly affect everyone but they seem to have lost their directions as of late. Are they too becoming incompetent or are they the ones that want the rest of society dumber than them so they can easily take advantage of everyone? It is evident that people who attend private schools do better but how many citizens can afford those costs?
as a nation/world? yes why do i say that because the hard working people who can afford kids and raise them properly are having 1-3 kids on the usual. but the people who cannot afford them or raise them properly are having 4 5 6 7 kids and most of them unfortunatly dont go past highschool and its starting to snowball
Uh huh. And what were the ratios historically? How many people in, say, the Dark Ages, went to school at all? Those who get an education are getting more educated than those who were educated in the past (there's more to know). Those who don't get an education are not, surely, less educated than those in the past who weren't. So the average must be rising, no?
There was a recent article in New Scientist on the fact that poor people breed more. The authors consider that to be a purely biological result, and due to the fact that poor people live shorter lives. They compare that to the widespread biological principle that short lived animals breed younger and more frequently than long lived animals. They conclude by noting that the 'poor breed more' effect is purely a result of the perception of poverty by those people. In countries with a wider gap between rich and poor, the 'poor breed more' effect is stronger than a nation with people even poorer, but with less of a gap to the relatively wealthier.
We will use genetic modification to enhance certain human traits. I don't think we'd purposely create people who are mentally handicapped. I just don't see society moving in that direction. Androids? Sure, that seems much more likely. That said, we actually don't place a high value on education as it is. Teachers are paid no where near a surgeons salary (at least in the West they are). We could do with a lot of improvement just in the educational process itself.
I don't think that we are getting dumber in general. It is not defined the set of things that you know how to do, it is defined by the set of things that you are capable of doing. Also, in general we know different things: We know how to use a computer and they didn't. They knew how to take care of farm animals, and most people nowadays, don't.
