Subject:
|
Re: Future of Humanity (was: lotsa stuff)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 29 Oct 2001 21:24:14 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
830 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Tom Stangl writes:
> Ross Crawford wrote:
>
> > > This is an interesting point. It is a generaisation, but in the UK low
> > > income families tend to have more kids than higher earners. Many couples
> > > (married or otherwsie) decide to have only one or no kids at all. If we
> > > assume (again a generisation) that low income familes have lower levels of
> > > intelligence (measured by lower levels of educational attainment) is our
> > > gene pool geing skewed the wrong way?
> >
> > Is there a "wrong way"?
>
> I would think that most people with at least middling intelligence would tend
> to agree that decreasing the overall intelligence level of our species is
> the "wrong way".
>
> Do you have a reason to think that decreasing our species intelligence is the
> right way to go?
Though admittedly a generalization, this trend in intelligence:breeding
rate is based on an evolutionarily insignificant stretch of time. Further,
even in the hypothetical example, the judging of intelligence based on
academic achievement seems a tenuous yardstick at best and may have little
or nothing to do with "actual" intelligence.
I also know that you're making a rhetorical generalization, but there's
obviously no way to know what effect a few (or even a few dozen) generations
in a small population will have on the overall course of human genetics.
It's an interesting example, however; in one swoop it evokes both Wells and
Marx, not to mention Huxley and all the rest.
But to answer your question, it seems a better evolutionary strategy in
the long run to increase, rather than decrease, species intelligence. But
who knows? Maybe somewhere down the line there'll be a virus that only
attacks people of a certain level of intelligence. I picture an amusement
park sign: You Must Be At Least As Dumb As This Sign To Survive The Plague...
Dave!
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Future of Humanity (was: lotsa stuff)
|
| (...) A couple of eminently debatable assertions. *Read Gould's "Mismeasure of Man" for a perspective on the furphy of IQ testing -- recent editions include a refutation of the premise and methodology that inform "The Bell Curve" c/ race /class. (...) (23 years ago, 29-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Future of Humanity (was: lotsa stuff)
|
| (...) I would think that most people with at least middling intelligence would tend to agree that decreasing the overall intelligence level of our species is the "wrong way". Do you have a reason to think that decreasing our species intelligence is (...) (23 years ago, 29-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
133 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
