Posted: Jun 08, 2014 5:56 am
by Darwinsbulldog
CAPSLOCK wrote:Hi,

Firstly, this is my first post, and while I do not intend to simply re-hash a old topic; I think there is a fairly important aspect to this conversation which has been overlooked.

Barring whether or not Crabtree's findings are accurate, verifiable, falsifiable and repeatable, it raises the question as to whether or not increased intelligence is still evolutionary favourable. Evolution acts to select the "fittest", the members of a species which have genetic adaptions that provide a advantage in their environment.

If studies found a tendency for a species-wide decrease in IQ, this doesn't mean that the advent modern medicine and society is preventing evolution, only that the environment has changed and there is no longer selective pressure for increasing intelligence.

Just my thoughts, I would highly appreciate any feedback. This really isn't my area of expertise, just something that interests me.

Intelligence will be regulated by evolution on a benefits vs costs basis. In terms of gross size, the human brain can't get much bigger, so improvements would have to be made on the connections. Of course, caesarian ops are a way to get around birth canal constraints.

Given the cost of social welfare, the negative aspects of globalization, the increase of robotics, etc, etc, intelligence may once more become vital for human survival. The poor, the uneducated and the lees bright may be in for a really, really rough time. Of course this has been true in less developed nations for some time, but now I think it will be global.
Most people [if the mass media are to be believed] are habituated to think that a global corporation can announce record billions of dollars in profit AND sacking thousands of workers in the same press release. Elections are now about the strength of the economy, with issues like education, welfare, equity etc pushed into the background.