Humans are Becoming Genetically Less Intelligent

Medicine, Science & Technology Forum

http://www.neoeugenics.com/

1. Human intelligence is largely hereditary.

2. Civilization depends totally upon innate intelligence. Without innate intelligence, civilization would never have been created. When intelligence declines, so does civilization.

3. The higher the level of civilization, the better off the population. Civilization is not an either-or proposition. Rather, it's a matter of degree, and each degree, up or down, affects the well-being of every citizen.

4. At the present time, we are evolving to become less intelligent with each new generation. Why is this happening? Simple: the least-intelligent people are having the most children.

5. Unless we halt or reverse this trend, our civilization will invariably decline. Any decline in civilization produces a commensurate increase in the collective "misery quotient."

Logic and scientific evidence stand behind each statement listed above.

So, what are your thoughts?

The inheritance of intelligence may be largely passed on through behavior, not genes.

keep that in mind.

now think about the fact that with each passing generation, kids grow up watching more and more TV. Playing more and more video games. Not only does this indoctrinate them with sort of a spoiled-brattedness that has been adequately dubbed "The Happy Meal Generation" (thanks HECK), but it lowers their attention span to be unable to recieve any information than 15 minute sound bytes. And it has to be entertaining too.

Not to mention kids that show any behavior that is at all odd (which are often the gifted students) are sent to the psychologist and prescribed speed to take daily for what... 10 years? I'm in college and I know some peeps who still take Ridelin.

Could it be our mainstream culture that is degrading the individual intellect, and not the other way around?

Thank you for the response. Regarding IQ, it is now universally accepted among brain scientists that it has a heritability rate of 80%. So, that only leaves us with 20% to work with on an environmental level. The thing is that to date, only improving nutrition has been shown to maximize that 20%, as well as ensuring a good fetal environment (not drinking or smoking when baby is in the womb), and breast-feeding babies also has shown to increase IQ. But, what about the constraining 80% of genetic IQ that can't be touched? If this is the part that is deteriorating, then society is in trouble.

Regards.

Someone mentioned to me that the average IQ of the human race is only 80.

Does IQ improve, ever? Does anyone know?

it may be "universally accepted" by scientists, but I don't believe it for a second.

What Does Adult IQ Mean?
Generally, one's mental age stops rising rapidly when one reaches the latter teens--e. g., 16. Consequently, on some IQ tests, "16" was taken as the chronological-age divisor in an IQ calculation for adults. The Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale is calibrated for all ages up to 70, with chronological-age divisors appropriate to every age 70 or below.
The average IQ is, by definition, 100. To get an idea what this means, someone with an IQ of 80 or below is considered to be marginally able to cope with the adult world. People with IQ's of 80 or below typically work as unskilled laborers such as lawn maintenance and trash pickup. They generally need help from friends or family to manage life's complications. About 10% of the population has an IQ of 80 or below.
People with IQ's of 80-90 are a little on the slow side but may be found in fast-food restaurants, day-care centers, etc. They may also be found in unskilled jobs. About 16% of the population has IQ's in this range.
People with IQ's of 90-110 generally occupy semi-skilled positions, including typists, receptionists, assembly line workers, and checkout clerks. They are able to keep up with the world, and comprise about 46% of the public.
People with IQ's in the 110 to 120 range fill the skilled trades and include some tool and die makers, teachers, and Ph. D.'s among their ranks. They also make up 16% of the population.
People with IQ's of 120 and above tend to staff the professions as doctors, dentists, lawyers, teachers, and college professors. They fall in the upper 10% of the population.

The average IQ of all college professors is 130, which lies within the upper 3% of the general public.

my dad read a book called Nature vs. Nurture. It was about what things are affected by genetics and what things are changed by environment. He recommended it to me but i haven't read it yet.

One thing he told me was that when they took children who had "dumb" parents (IQ score is what they went by i believe) who were living with foster parents who were smart, like teachers and scientists, the children would still tend to not have interest in things like science and math and would get bad grades and have trouble learning in class, even though the foster parents would make them study and do their homework and surround them with knowledge. Some of the foster children would get good grades in school and learn what they needed to learn, but after they moved out, they would tend to stop learning and go back to their dumb ways. Thankfully i don't have the dumb gene but it's interesting that people who aren't smart, can't really help, or they don't want to help it, because of their genes. It almost makes me want to give them more respect seeing that it's not really their fault, but they're still dumb, and therefore, they're still annoying.

I am not arguing that predisposition is not there. But it cannot be said that the genetic structure inherited from the parents is immutable and that children born of parents of lesser intelligence will remain dumb.

M.

Im sorry...I dont get the "dumb gene" comment. What's that all about?

Many geniuses have been born from normal parents.

In order to have a child with a gene that becomes dominant, one of the parents must be a carrier of the gene. If neither parent had a carrier gene, then the kid wont have it either.

Simple biology.

Just because people arent carriers of this "Genius" gene doesnt mean that people will forever be stupid.

Alot of it is just how one uses their brain and how one processes the information.

Alot of it has to do with how a child is taught to study and the parents involvement in their education.

To claim that it is strictly genetic is absurd!

Ridiculous comment! This lacks complete intellegence.

quote:

I wonder how highly evolved this person is who came up with this logical and scientific data and analysis?

I wonder myself. I would have to imagine that alot of it came from T-Un1t's dad.

post #15 quote:

Im sorry...I dont get the "dumb gene" comment. What's that all about?

Many geniuses have been born from normal parents.

In order to have a child with a gene that becomes dominant, one of the parents must be a carrier of the gene. If neither parent had a carrier gene, then the kid wont have it either.

Simple biology.

Alot of it is just how one uses their brain and how one processes the information.


I been telling you:

It just keeps being passed down from one "Lying, cheating Woman" to another.

Any intelligence I have has been bourne and nurtured out of mere survival.
If I hadn't been gifted with what little intelligence I have, I do believe I would have been dead at a young age, in fact I am certain of it.
And these genes will be going nowhere.

all i can say is there are people in this world (a couple sitting in the same room as me right now) who have never had, or never will have any interest in the type of knowledge that we deem as useful, i.e. Science, Math, literature, etc.

Now, according to the book that's actually titled Nature via Nurture, these people were born with this lack of intelligence. Whether that's caused by a certain gene they inherited or lack thereof is yet to be determined, but the fact is, these people were born like that. Scientists have studied these people growing up in all different environments and it's often the same outcome. I know some of you like to make yourselves feel smarter by claiming you don't believe all of these scientists' theories and following the "don't believe everything you read" idea, but i've seen with my own eyes these people who just don't have any interest in certain areas and i believe that this disinterest comes from somewhere other than your upbringing.

Also, i was browsing around amazon and came across this book that looked pretty cool called The Dependent Gene: The Fallacy of "Nature vs. Nurture" which might point out some of the flaws of the other book.

T-Un1T

Just because someone doesn't have the same interests as you doesn't make them less intelligent.

People value different things not because they are incapable of understanding, but simply because they are interested in other subjects.

People can be as smart as a whip in math, science, astronomy, physics (whatever you deem important) and absolutely stupid when it comes to common sense and people skills.

We are all made differently. One person is not better or more intelligent than another because we all have different gifts.

And while we are at it. Look at technology today. It's increasing all the more. Scientific/computer knowledge doubles every three months...

and yet we still kill, maim and torture one another for various reasons.
Tell me, exactly how have we evolved?

We just have more advanced ways of killing one another when a simple baseball bat can do the trick.

the reason people are becoming dumber is because less intelligence is needed to survive nowadays.

Sure! It took extraordinary intelligence to make the technological advances we have today (cars, computers, etc.)

It does NOT, however, take much intelligence to operate these things. Anyone who has spent any amount of time on the road can attest to this fact.

Computers are becoming more "user-friendly." In other words, you don't really need to know anything about the inner workings of the computer in order to use it.

Humans used to have to track and hunt to survive. Later, they had to sow seeds and till and whatnot and harvest in the right manner, in the right season. If you screwed up... YOU STARVED.

Nowadays, all you have to do is whine the loudest and suck up as much as you can to get ahead.

The declining intelligence is not a genetic issue, it's an issue of atrophy. We aren't using are brains, so they become weak and stupid.

Dekka said :

The declining intelligence is not a genetic issue, it's an issue of atrophy. We aren't using are brains, so they become weak and stupid.


I guess I am a perfect example of that. http://smilies.sofrayt.com/fsc/pain.gif

When I was in uni I read a book by Dr Howard Gardner about a theory of "multiple" intelligence. It was outdated when I read it, there were seven types of intelligence outlined, I believe, but the theory has been revised since and I think it's now 9.

The seven types I read about were linguistic, logical (maths and stuff), kinesthetic (movement), spatial, musical, interpersonal and intrapersonal. There's also one about nature now... and... something like spiritual. I forget the last one... But each one is different to the other, but looking at them, who here can say they excel at each of them?

Though I don't think the theory is conclusive or perfect, I did think it was a great way to think about intelligence, rather than thinking "okay, that dude plays football or basketball or whatever, he's an idiot." But honestly, I don't couldn't move and maneuver like a footballer or basketballer does, and it's not because I'm not fit or nubile.

sorry to bump in my observation, intelligence CAN'T based on any hereditary means! Cause... my dad's a valevictorian and my mom was a salutatorian.

and I'm quite an average girl, if insightful (not meaning to boast.)

--kat

[quote] the reason people are becoming dumber is because less intelligence is needed to survive nowadays.[/quote

I suppose I could understand how you got that.

People in the past had alot more mental capacity than we did... or at least that was my impression of the educated ones. Of course... more than 90% of the world during the 19th centuray wasn't educated but being educated is different than being smart, I understand.

... or maybe it's the books I'm reading and the my own personal conclusions...

Good points, Twisted Wizard and Dekka00. People are very adaptable and adjust to the surroundings they find themselves in or build for themselves. Creating a society in which everyone is expected to be able to survive means everything needs to be made simple and easy to do. If we expect everyone to get a job and survive in this society, jobs need to be suited to the disabled and the low IQ as well as having jobs for the physical Adonis and Aphrodite types and the super genius types. And when we go home after work all our household items work easily and effortlessly.
I actually clicked the link to the Neo-Eugenics site and it looks no different than Eugenics did in the late 1800's and early 1900's. Still every bit as racist and controlling of human behavior as before.
I really see this as an excuse for certain men who think they are superior to spread their seed far and wide, regardless of the receiving women's opinion on the subject. It harkens back to fuedal Europe when the lords bedded the bride before a marraige could be consumated. There was a belief that royal blood and lordly blood was better than peasant blood. So they did their duty of spreading the better blood by bedding all the virgins.
Of course there was also the tradition of the eldest son being heir to whatever fortunes these marraiges accumulated at the death of the father. So even the bastard children of the upper class ended up better off than peasant children over the long run, proving their belief system to be valid. That the law of inheritance was what created the disparity was apparently lost on the intellectual giants of the time.
Becker, I think you IQ information is hilarious at the end where university professors are in the top 3% of IQ. If it is true, it remains hilarious but also frightening.
Asian-American, this just proves what IQ tests are testing for is people who think like and share the same values as the professors who create the tests in the first place. That they may have children that will test better on their tests and may share their values and goals is not a surprise. That they should have a higher duty to spread their seed among the populous like the lords of old is absurd. People have different values and goals and desires so they obviously dedicate their intellectual abilities to different things. That their values are not the rigorous pursuit of a PhD at a university only disappoints those who gain from having university students. The university professor who create IQ tests. The IQ test is an advertisement for others who share the values and goals of professors to come to university and spend money to be taught how to carry on the tradition. I could also point out that higher family economic status relates to higher test scores but that makes the whole system sound too similar to fuedalism.

This is why smart people should have more sex. All you hot and smart girls out there should just send me a message and we'll get it on.

Excellent.

Reminds me of that movie Idiocracy, where all the stupid people kept having kids until the entire populaion were drooling lumps.

-HECK!