3 ms·

In the ensuing arms race to show off and get a mate it has been exaggerated in the way that a peacock’s tail is. This process of sexual selection, Dr Miller and

In the ensuing arms race to show off and get a mate it has been exaggerated in the way that a peacock’s tail is. This process of sexual selection, Dr Miller and his followers believe, is the reason people have become so brainy. I hope this isn't true, because if sexual selection is the cause of human intelligence, this means that American men are slowly turning into illiterate redneck bikers with excellent "game". Foreign ladies FTW.

gcheong 18y ago
Things like this always remind me of the movie Idiocracy of which the first 10min or so is best part: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0387808/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0387808/
- smanek 18y ago
  http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1597642154209383351 http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1597642154209383351
randomwalker 18y ago
Were you trying to be funny (if so, a smiley would help a lot), or do you not get that evolution works on a different time scale? Cultural evolution has dramatically outpaced biological evolution in humans in the last millenium, making the latter irrelevant. In the realm of intelligence, cultural progress (which encompasses better education, nutrition, technology, and everything else) has led to the Flynn effect, a gain of 3-5 IQ points per decade. Biological evolution in Homo sapiens has given us at most 100 IQ points (but probably closer to 50) in the last 74,000 years. The former is three orders of magnitude faster!
- mynameishere 18y ago
  Nutrition, Education, etc, have continual costs. If we have a continuously dropping natural intelligence, then the part of our intelligence derived from the environment will only get more expensive. That's unsustainable. The Flynn effect itself will probably stop or slow all-but-completely anyway http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6W4M-4D45TJ5-2&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=330207de9f6934746f11f1ad5b9a9096 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi...
- bd 18y ago
  From my understanding, recent IQ gains are more akin to recent increases of the life expectancy. Evolution slowly created a biological basis for the maximum life span/intelligence (including genetics-based variability with relatively few individuals able to achieve extremes). Cultural progress just allowed more people to: a) live longer up to their genetic maximum, b) be smarter up to their genetic maximum. Thus it shifted the averages but not the extremes. Flynn effect seems to support this: gains in IQ predominantly occur at the low end of the distribution. See also discussion on iodine deficiency, it's the same principle: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=386449 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=386449
  - opticksversi 18y ago
    Cultural progress just allowed more people to: a) live longer up to their genetic maximum, b) be smarter up to their genetic maximum. How did you come to believe that there could be such a thing as a genetic maximum to phenotypic traits?

gcheong 18y ago

Things like this always remind me of the movie Idiocracy of which the first 10min or so is best part: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0387808/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0387808/

smanek 18y ago
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1597642154209383351 http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1597642154209383351

randomwalker 18y ago

Were you trying to be funny (if so, a smiley would help a lot), or do you not get that evolution works on a different time scale? Cultural evolution has dramatically outpaced biological evolution in humans in the last millenium, making the latter irrelevant. In the realm of intelligence, cultural progress (which encompasses better education, nutrition, technology, and everything else) has led to the Flynn effect, a gain of 3-5 IQ points per decade. Biological evolution in Homo sapiens has given us at most 100 IQ points (but probably closer to 50) in the last 74,000 years. The former is three orders of magnitude faster!

mynameishere 18y ago
Nutrition, Education, etc, have continual costs. If we have a continuously dropping natural intelligence, then the part of our intelligence derived from the environment will only get more expensive. That's unsustainable. The Flynn effect itself will probably stop or slow all-but-completely anyway http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6W4M-4D45TJ5-2&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=330207de9f6934746f11f1ad5b9a9096 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi...
bd 18y ago
From my understanding, recent IQ gains are more akin to recent increases of the life expectancy. Evolution slowly created a biological basis for the maximum life span/intelligence (including genetics-based variability with relatively few individuals able to achieve extremes). Cultural progress just allowed more people to: a) live longer up to their genetic maximum, b) be smarter up to their genetic maximum. Thus it shifted the averages but not the extremes. Flynn effect seems to support this: gains in IQ predominantly occur at the low end of the distribution. See also discussion on iodine deficiency, it's the same principle: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=386449 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=386449
- opticksversi 18y ago
  Cultural progress just allowed more people to: a) live longer up to their genetic maximum, b) be smarter up to their genetic maximum. How did you come to believe that there could be such a thing as a genetic maximum to phenotypic traits?