If that is true, then you have to find the phenotypes that matter. So far, after a century of trying, they only exist after an extensive factor analysis in inte

If that is true, then you have to find the phenotypes that matter. So far, after a century of trying, they only exist after an extensive factor analysis in intelligence testing, a statistical method known for giving biased results if you feed it with biased data. No, if anything there would be a natural selection against intelligence. As society grows more complex there is less and less need for any individual to be smarter as humans operate better collectively. However for such a minor trait in the overall scheme of survival, I doubt there has been any time in the past 50k years to select for or against it. As for continental differences in humans. Humans are a remarkably homogeneous species. Isolated populations are far less common among humans then among other mammals. Any difference between population is bound to be insignificant next to the difference between individuals. I am aware Lewontin’s fallacy (it is weird, that Lewontin’s “fallacy” is always brought up at this point; as if the goalpost keeps shifting. See https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=Lewontin%20by%3Arunarberg&sort=byPopularity&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...)