Possiblity: Human evolution is getting faster

[Atomic_Piggy]

:thumbs:

And to think I thought I was being TOO flamboyant.

My god I am so sorry.

*breathes a collective sigh of relief*

 

[noQ]

Acting a fundamentalist here is like going to Bronx with a KKK suit on.

 

[Dan]

I don't see how we can be evolving faster since we've removed 90% of selective pressures via civilisation, medicine and technology...

Removing pressures doesn't stop evolution. If anything it speeds it up, because there is more room for diversity. It lets the gene pool spread out more.

 

[Druckles]

It might not necessarily encourage beneficial evolution, however. As has been pointed out, we seem to be devolving a bit.

 

[repiV]

Also, modern civilisation presents a huge variety of challenges that we are not equipped to deal with.

For example, our brains are designed to cope with societies that number only 150 people. The theory goes that the world is such a ****ed up place because we simply aren't intelligent enough to deal with the size and scope of the civilisation we have created. It's also suggested that the main purpose of intelligence is to be able to deal with complicated social situations - the main thing that separates humans from chimps, chimps from dogs and so on is our range of social skills. For example, humans have an excellent ability to understand what other people are thinking - chimps can have some idea of what one other chimp may be thinking or feeling, but they couldn't follow complicated social situations involving multiple people. So in time we should become more intelligent in order to deal with the world we have created and can't cope with properly.
Not to mention all the physical challenges that are unique to modern civilisation but that our bodies are not equipped to deal with - 40 hours a week sat at a PC, no need to exercise, bullet wounds, motorcycle accidents, zero gravity to name but a few examples.

 

[Pesmerga]

dictionary.com defines evolution as Biology. change in the gene pool of a population from generation to generation by such processes as mutation, natural selection, and genetic drift.

So... yes, we're changing. The more members of a community you have, the number of members the next generation will have will increase, which means more genetic changes.

But I don't really think we're "adapting" to the world. Unless I'm mistaken, adaptation is the process by which random genes survive to pass their genes to the next generation, while old or "bad" genes die and thus cannot reproduce.

Generally speaking, poorer families have more children than upper class citizens do. So the human species, generally, will have more less intelligent, less motivated humans than bright, aspiring ones. I agree with the consensus that humanity is getting stupider, but there will always be bright minds out there that can control those stupid masses for the benefit (or exploitation) of civilization.

 

[repiV]

dictionary.com defines evolution as Biology. change in the gene pool of a population from generation to generation by such processes as mutation, natural selection, and genetic drift.

So... yes, we're changing. The more members of a community you have, the number of members the next generation will have will increase, which means more genetic changes.

But I don't really think we're "adapting" to the world. Unless I'm mistaken, adaptation is the process by which random genes survive to pass their genes to the next generation, while old or "bad" genes die and thus cannot reproduce.

Generally speaking, poorer families have more children than upper class citizens do. So the human species, generally, will have more less intelligent, less motivated humans than bright, aspiring ones. I agree with the consensus that humanity is getting stupider, but there will always be bright minds out there that can control those stupid masses for the benefit (or exploitation) of civilization.

How can we be getting stupider, though?
Examining history, you could be forgiven for thinking the humans of milennia past were dumb pieces of shit. After the ancient empires, Europe was peasants and pitchforks up until the 1500s or so.

 

[Irksome]

Acting a fundamentalist here is like going to Bronx with a KKK suit on.

lol - I've come to learn this. I knew I'd get a response but hot damn I thought someone was going to pitchfork' me right in the face through the monitor.

 

[Pesmerga]

Can a case be made that, generally speaking, poorer people are also less intelligent?

I'd really have to research what intelligence is before I could make any more presumptions, though. I mean, there's what you can learn in a book and then there's problem solving ability, creativity, philosophy, logical, reasoning, etc, which are (as I assume, I may be wrong here) genetic traits and results of the environment in early childhood.

 

[Druckles]

That film makes more sense when I hear it...

 

[repiV]

Can a case be made that, generally speaking, poorer people are also less intelligent?

I'd really have to research what intelligence is before I could make any more presumptions, though. I mean, there's what you can learn in a book and then there's problem solving ability, creativity, philosophy, logical, reasoning, etc, which are (as I assume, I may be wrong here) genetic traits and results of the environment in early childhood.

In any modern democratic capitalist society, poorer people are definitely less intelligent. But the lack of intelligence is more likely to cause the lack of success, rather than the other way around. And then of course the next generation has less of an opportunity to develop their intelligence due to their poor and unintelligent parents.
You don't see many smart people kickin' it in the 'hood or hanging around on street corners all day drinking cider...

Interestingly, apparently the hierarchy of the Nazi leadership directly correlated with their IQ scores. The most intelligent at the top, then the second most intelligent, and so on in that order.

 

[Pesmerga]

Right- so if

1) poorer people have more kids
2) poorer people are stupider
3) stupid is a genetic trait / result of poor parenting

Humanity is getting stupider.




Right?

 

[Druckles]

No...

1) Stupid people have more kids
2) Stupid is gentic
3) Humanity is getting stupider

 

[repiV]

Right- so if

1) poorer people have more kids
2) poorer people are stupider
3) stupid is a genetic trait / result of poor parenting

Humanity is getting stupider.

Right?

You got me there. Today's stupid people are probably as smart as the ordinary people of 1000 years ago - and there are vast differences in intelligence across nations today, so no reason why there wouldn't be across the years too. In sub-Saharan Africa, the average IQ ranges from like 59 to 75, which would be considered mentally retarded by our education system. Western countries generally between 90 and 100 and east Asian countries score top...between 100 and 108.

In reality though, it's probably a very small minority of people that are responsible for shaping the society we have, the rest just live here.

 

[Solaris]

You got me there. Today's stupid people are probably as smart as the ordinary people of 1000 years ago - and there are vast differences in intelligence across nations today, so no reason why there wouldn't be across the years too. In sub-Saharan Africa, the average IQ ranges from like 59 to 75, which would be considered mentally retarded by our education system. Western countries generally between 90 and 100 and east Asian countries score top...between 100 and 108.

In reality though, it's probably a very small minority of people that are responsible for shaping the society we have, the rest just live here.

That's ridiculous bordering on racist.

I'd like to see some substantial evidence to support your claims here. Becuase, whilst I would not dispute that people in poorer countries are less skilled and know less, this is becuase of their standard of education. IQ tests are different however, they test raw intelligence and I do not believe this varies according to race or ethnicity.

 

[xcellerate]

when do we all start becoming X-Men?

 

[noQ]

when do we all start becoming X-Men?

Now. But your darn glasses on Cyclops, your laser vision has been burnzing my ass.

 

[Eejit]

Removing pressures doesn't stop evolution. If anything it speeds it up, because there is more room for diversity. It lets the gene pool spread out more.

Diversity != Evolution

You need more than just diversity to evolve, you need to select for certain phenotypes or you need a founder effect.
The founder effect happened during/after the diaspora from Africa but in the modern world? No chance unless we make a colony on mars and it gets cut off -.-

 

[delusional]

Isn't IQ tests biased towards western culture? We seem to emphasize science and mathematics and literature, but in other societies the most intelligent person has good social skills can sing or whatever.

 

[repiV]

That's ridiculous bordering on racist.

I'd like to see some substantial evidence to support your claims here. Becuase, whilst I would not dispute that people in poorer countries are less skilled and know less, this is becuase of their standard of education. IQ tests are different however, they test raw intelligence and I do not believe this varies according to race or ethnicity.

Ooh, I'm such a racist pig.

Who said anything about poor countries anyway? The People's Republic of China has a higher average IQ than most Western nations. I also would have thought it would be bleeding obvious that the world's banana republics are eternal shitholes because they're full of morons, but I guess political correctness must be accounted for before we judge reality...

 

[repiV]

Isn't IQ tests biased towards western culture? We seem to emphasize science and mathematics and literature, but in other societies the most intelligent person has good social skills can sing or whatever.

IQ tests have nothing to do with science, mathematics or literature. They test basic arithmetic, spatial awareness, verbal reasoning and things like that. The foundations of logical thought.

 

[ríomhaire]

The Time Machine is about humanity evolving into different species. It's great. Much better than any of the films.

 

[Druckles]

Indeed. Good film. Well, not so great. But Good book.

Was great how the portayed it in the film, however. With two almost totally different primates above and underground.

See you have an Arthur C Clarke quote in your sig, no less

 

[Atomic_Piggy]

Ooh, I'm such a racist pig.

Hong Kong has the highest IQ eh? :frown:

 

[Ennui]

IQ tests do have cultural bias.

 

[PortalStormzzzz]

well yea we're evolving faster. Wars and a massive gene pool allow that. Pretty soon we'll by big brained alien-like things able to pick things up by mind.

 

[Eejit]

well yea we're evolving faster. Wars and a massive gene pool allow that. Pretty soon we'll by big brained alien-like things able to pick things up by mind.

No, we really aren't.

Modern warfare is completely random selection genetically...


It's debateable if we're evolving at all anymore, having removed competition for food, shelter, testing physical fitness against predators, and even most diseases.

 

[Pesmerga]

Evolution is certainly taking place. We're not adapting to anything specifically, but our genes are certainly changing.

 

[Eejit]

But there's no selection for those changes, therefore we aren't evolving. Sure there are still random mutations and recombination at the same rate but they won't have any real positive selection for them unless it's simply something like e.g. fitter sperm.

 

[PortalStormzzzz]

yep. Like the increase in fatness in America will eventually produce fatless people.

 

[Eejit]

.... le sigh

 

[PortalStormzzzz]

But there's no selection for those changes, therefore we aren't evolving. Sure there are still random mutations and recombination at the same rate but they won't have any real positive selection for them unless it's simply something like e.g. fitter sperm.

WHAAAA? Human Sperm is getting much better. PROOF:

le fook. Excuse my french.

 

[Dalamari]

FOX DIE!

tbh

 

[repiV]

IQ tests do have cultural bias.

How?
They require no prior knowledge and can even be conducted verbally for the illiterate. They test all the fundamental mental abilities required to be economically successful in modern society, which also demonstrate intellect.

 

[Solaris]

How?
They require no prior knowledge and can even be conducted verbally for the illiterate. They test all the fundamental mental abilities required to be economically successful in modern society, which also demonstrate intellect.

Not true. It depends on the environment you grow up in; people living in tribes grow up in very different environments and learn very different skills, it doesn't make them inferior, just different.

 

[repiV]

Not true. It depends on the environment you grow up in; people living in tribes grow up in very different environments and learn very different skills, it doesn't make them inferior, just different.

Of course it makes them inferior. They don't learn any of the skills necessary for success in today's world, or for constructing a more advanced and enlightened society. What other definition of inferior can there possibly be?

You might aswell say that the people who grew up in tenth century Britain learned very different skills to those growing up today - they weren't inferior, just different. Clearly that's nonsense, and it's an apt comparison because tenth century Britain was arguably more civilised than many African nations today.

You're being a hypocrite - I'm sure you have little respect for people who study mickey mouse subjects at university. I'm sure you despise chavs that possess none of the skills necessary for success in our society, but who actually have a lot of other skills that you and I don't. Are they not inferior either? Just different?

 

[Solaris]

Of course it makes them inferior. They don't learn any of the skills necessary for success in today's world, or for constructing a more advanced and enlightened society. What other definition of inferior can there possibly be?

You might aswell say that the people who grew up in tenth century Britain learned very different skills to those growing up today - they weren't inferior, just different. Clearly that's nonsense, and it's an apt comparison because tenth century Britain was arguably more civilised than many African nations today.

You're being a hypocrite - I'm sure you have little respect for people who study mickey mouse subjects at university. I'm sure you despise chavs that possess none of the skills necessary for success in our society, but who actually have a lot of other skills that you and I don't. Are they not inferior either? Just different?

You accept that, if indeed people from third world countries have lower IQ's, which I'm not agreeing they do yet, that it is environmental and not genetic?

 

[nurizeko]

:thumbs:

And to think I thought I was being TOO flamboyant.

In my defense my post was the result of a defense mechanism.

 

[Exploder]

:thumbs:

And to think I thought I was being TOO flamboyant.

I hate it when you can't have a intelligent discussion about a subject because you're too brainwashed to respond rationally. You're a good example. It's funny that you haven't replied yet.

Anyway, the link is borked, it has been removed. Human evolution is a pretty big subject. I could guess that in the most civlilized parts of the world, humanity is in a dead spot because of medicine, food and wealth.

 

[repiV]

You accept that, if indeed people from third world countries have lower IQ's, which I'm not agreeing they do yet, that it is environmental and not genetic?

Not necessarily. According to many studies, particularly concerning adopted children, IQ is primarily genetic.
In any case, I don't see that it's relevant - we're discussing the impact of intelligence on wealth. Intelligent people are more successful, and by the same token, intelligent societies are too.
It seems like you're just looking for an excuse to feign outrage.