I think we are taming ourselves

[Genzel]

While I constantly amuse myself at how stupid people seem to be, I do think that people are getting generally more intelligent as time progresses. The stupid portions of the population are and always will be the loudest (dunning-kruger affect? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect)

 

IQ's have risen 24 points since 1914 (http://www.newsweek.com/2001/04/22/are-we-getting-smarter.html), (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn_effect), graduation rates are actually going up while at the same time education standards actually are RISING (http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=38, http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d04/figures/fig_03.asp?referrer=figures)

 

Just some things to think about.

Edited March 27, 2011 by Genzel

[Ihoe]

First, a little evolutionary biology. Natural selection is the driving force behind evolution. When a trait or group of traits is advantageous to a species it is selected for as those traits contribute to the overall reproductive success of the individuals who possess them. Traits which are a detriment to a species are usually selected against, and such traits disappear quickly as members fail to pass these traits to their offspring, or their offspring fail to reproduce themselves.

 

But what happens to traits that no longer have any effect on a species ability to successfully reproduce? They degrade. The second driving force behind evolution is genetic mutation. It is because of many mutations that accumulate over time that cause this degradation. Because the trait is no longer an advantage to the species its strengths are not selected for through natural selection. That means that any mutations that degrade those traits are not eliminated because they do not affect the individual’s reproductive success. Examples of this can be seen throughout nature, from now-useless organs in our own bodies to cave-fish with eyes that no longer function.

Now on to the dumbing of the human race:

 

Despite our continuing advances in science and technology, these advances are being made as a result of a brain whose latent abilities were evolved long ago, not as a result of a brain that is continuing to grow “smarter”. Our ancestors needed every bit of brain power they could muster in order to survive in the harsh conditions that they lived in. But whatever conditions they had to contend with to survive are no longer an issue for anyone alive today. The brains they developed have allowed us to create technology that has made us wildly successful in terms of reproduction.

Though the raw mental power that we possess continues to serve us well, it is no longer something that factors in to our survival like it did a million years ago. Reproductive success in today’s world is no longer heavily influenced by a person’s innate mental abilities.

 

Because of this, I think that the human brain is to us what the eyes of the cave-fish are to them. We are at the height of human intellect. As mutations that hinder the brains processing ability accumulate and as mutations that improved those abilities disappear, barring any use of genetic engineering or a renewed need for our powerful brains, our mental abilities should begin to decline over the next million years until the balance between what we need to survive and what we don’t is restored.

now that's a... Theory.

 

you won't lose your brain by not using it. it's still there, it only becomes harder to use.

the society affects your brain usage, if you (for example) have a tamed, underdeveloped brain, it can develop under the condition of need. of course since the beginning of the recorded history the society was "always" divided into two groups: the commoners and the intellectuals. the commoner may not develop their brain under the conditions they live in, but the intellectual has the power to effectively use the brain and thus develop and only develop themselves, not their children, not their ancestors. we still have intellectuals today, people like Mr.X that sell plastic junk under glamorous looks to the masses, based on your theory which defects their brain, but actually, only THEIR brain.

 

how can genetic characteristics that are found in human DNA from as far as 1000 years ago defect, any proof to it, it's just a theory. the IQ is not a characteristic, it's an entity. it can change through reproduction in the offspring, but cannot change itself. if it could we wouldn't see a genius like Jacob Barnett in a family of what we would call "normal people", he possesses a gene that could have been hundreds of years old, and it was not used in his other family members for long, did it deflect?

 

if a nuka nuke drops and wipes out the civilization, the people left as nomads will still develop as well as humans from 1000 years ago.

 

but i must say, i sort of agree with you, people who would think themselves as individuals are so fed up on theories of the real individuals that have forgotten the backbone of science: thinking. they never bring up the paradoxes and inconsistencies in the current scientific theories, every sandwich is just made for them to eat.

Edited March 30, 2011 by Ihoe