Society culls itself

francois said:
These days due to improvements in transportation like the highway system, cars, planes, etc., it's ever more the case that smart people find themselves working, socializing, and having families with smart people.
Or maybe, these days with life so technologically smooth, more dumb people survive with the resources to remain attractive and breed - so the odds of breeding with someone dumb are greater, for everyone.

So we're in a time of expansion of the gene pool. The culling will come later, and the verdict on who's actually smart and dumb will be delivered then.
 
Or maybe, these days with life so technologically smooth, more dumb people survive with the resources to remain attractive and breed - so the odds of breeding with someone dumb are greater, for everyone.

So we're in a time of expansion of the gene pool. The culling will come later, and the verdict on who's actually smart and dumb will be delivered then.

There's a book about what you're talking about--dysgenics--by a psychologist named Richard Lynn. He says it's happening, despite what we hear about the Flynn effect. People continually degenerating because of the lack of influence of natural selection on keeping our gene pools strong and healthy. He says people are getting dumber, and are exhibiting less "conscientiousness," which he presumably ascribes to a degradation of the genome. I'm sure this is happening at least to some extent. But I'm not terribly concerned. Bigger and more troubling things are coming our way soon.

So yeah, I'd agree with you, people on the whole are losing genetic quality, due to technology, and are probably getting dumber. But that doesn't mean that certain subsets of the population aren't getting progressively smarter. The odds of any given person having breeding with someone dumb are better, but the odds of a brilliant person breeding with someone dumb are much smaller than they use to be.
 
francois said:
So yeah, I'd agree with you, people on the whole are losing genetic quality, due to technology, and are probably getting dumber.
You've got two conflicting trend possibilities here - one is that society is stratifying by genetic intelligence, the other is that society - all of it - is being suffused in genetic dumbnity.

My own personal take is that I have serious doubts about the conceptions of intelligence and genetic inheritance involved in any of this. As a rule of thumb, from an evolutionary point of view, it does a species good to build up a lot of genetic variety whenever it can. The evaluation of it is normally supplied by events. Possibly we are in a new era of cultural dominance over genetic evolution, and it will be permanent. But that's not how to bet, IMHO.
 
Idiocracy

lol. fun stuff there.

society culls itself pretty readily in many ways. suicide is an interesting case, war, famine (as sam kinneson said, stop sending aid - send u-hauls instead... and have them MOVE TO WHERE THE FOOD IS OHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!! NOTHIGN GROWS IN THE DESERT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! - but we don't), etc. i think we do it all the time.
 
You've got two conflicting trend possibilities here - one is that society is stratifying by genetic intelligence, the other is that society - all of it - is being suffused in genetic dumbnity.

My own personal take is that I have serious doubts about the conceptions of intelligence and genetic inheritance involved in any of this. As a rule of thumb, from an evolutionary point of view, it does a species good to build up a lot of genetic variety whenever it can. The evaluation of it is normally supplied by events. Possibly we are in a new era of cultural dominance over genetic evolution, and it will be permanent. But that's not how to bet, IMHO.

The truth that general intelligence is transmitted genetically is not a controversial point in the science community anymore. Perhaps, there is a bit of contention on just how powerful the genetic controls are, but it's mostly accepted that they are very powerful and influential. Most identical twins studies I've read show a correlation value of about r^2 of .8 (I'm pretty sure) for the IQs of paired twins. It's not a fact to be discounted or trifled with. You still see stuff in popular magazines and Internet articles saying stuff like "New study suggests intelligence is inherited (Ooooh! Controversial!)" But in reality this stuff has been known for a long, long time already.

If you don't think intelligence is inherited, you might as well stop believing in heliocentrism or evolution. Plus, if you think about it logically, intelligence must have genetic controls. You don't need ID twin studies to tell you that. Trees aren't very intelligent compared to humans, are they? Can you nurture an oak tree to have the IQ of Einstein? No. There logically has to be intelligence genes. There's no escape.
 
Presumably there is a very useful statistically correct and universally applicable ratio this phenomenon? I hate to use the somewhat unscientific terminology used here but what the heck lets just call it the intelligent:dumb ratio. It looks something like this:
intelligent : dumb

As the human population rises so do the number of smart and dumb people exponetially. So far so dumb. What you would need to find out is whether there have been any increases either side of the ration in the 21st century compared to previous centuries.

For example in 1850 the smartness to dumbness ratio may have been 1:2
Since 1950, however that ratio may have changed to 1:36

Yikes the dummies ARE taking over the world but they are so stupid they will kill, sorry cull, themselves so everything will be ok for the smarties again soon.


Threads like this are rubbish.
 
Yikes the dummies ARE taking over the world but they are so stupid they will kill, sorry cull, themselves so everything will be ok for the smarties again soon.


Threads like this are rubbish.

Dumb is relative. :shrug:
 
So yeah, I'd agree with you, people on the whole are losing genetic quality, due to technology, and are probably getting dumber.

And who has access and the most dependence on technology: those with more money. In fact they tend to pay people to solve problems for them. And those who must make ends meet and problem solve in the lower rungs of society, and make their way through dangerous neighborhoods where they are relegated, etc.,

these people would be challenged, kept alert, cannot be so dependent on technology.

If we look at what rises to the top, take the Bush Administration, we see what can happen when you are surrounded by wealth and technology from the get go.
 
It does. Read The Bell Curve. These days due to improvements in transportation like the highway system, cars, planes, etc., it's ever more the case that smart people find themselves working, socializing, and having families with smart people. The opposite of this is also true. It's ever more the case that dumb people find themselves working, socializing, and having families with dumb people. Richard Herrnstein and Charles Murray call this social stratification. Intelligence is extremely highly influenced by genetics and therefore, since it's increasingly the case that dumb people are mating with dumb people and smart people are mating with smart people, it's likely that people are getting dumber and smarter than ever before. There will be a much starker difference between the elite and the downtrodden in the decades to come.

The debate about intelligence is a red herring.

If you look at the fossil record, which covers millions of years of human evolution, you will see numerous examples of earlier versions of human types, all with different degrees of prognathism, and all of which were destroyed or went 'extinct'. This physical trait, however, is still highly visible amongst some contemporary human populations, who occupy regions of the world rich in natural resources. Ergo, you have ample evolutionary and economic justification for your cull, without any need to refer to abstract ideas like intelligence.
 
All humans are the same species. Your misuse of a term designating certain physiological traits of the jaw is pathetic and probably racist.
 
All humans are the same species. Your misuse of a term designating certain physiological traits of the jaw is pathetic and probably racist.

What has a social concept like race got to do with this?

I'm talking strictly biology, as is proven by this fossil record of human evolution.

hominids2.jpg
 
What has a social concept like race got to do with this?

I'm talking strictly biology, as is proven by this fossil record of human evolution.

hominids2.jpg

Deepthought, all humans living today are a member of the subspecies Homo sapiens sapiens. That is strictly biology.
 
My point is you are simply splitting hairs concerning abstract concepts like intelligence when a large proportion of humans are still prognathic, ie, their evolution was arrested, well over one million years ago.

Intelligence matters a whole lot more in a person than whether he has a prognathism or supra orbital prominence (ape features).
 
Back
Top