"... in modern society, natural selection has become indifferent toward intelligence, so that in a society in which intelligence is systematically debased, stupid people easily out-breed the intelligent, creating, over the course of five centuries, an irredeemably dysfunctional society. Consequently, the children of the educated elites are drowned in a sea of sexually promiscuous, illiterate, alcoholic, degenerate peers." Source.

As far as I know, Stephen Hawking doesn't have any kids. Neither did Einstein, Newton, Alan Turing, Dawkins and a bunch of other intellectual notables. The average middle class westerner probably has 2 kids max, in contrast to goat herders, slash-and-burn cultivators and dictators from the other parts of the world where some can have up to 14 children. Yup, the dumb ones are outbreeding the smart ones by as much as 10 to 1.

If you've been to the UK, you'll know that the best selling newspaper is The Sun. To put it bluntly, its a paper that smart intellectuals don't usually buy.

Do you think over time, we will become a planet of idiots as the smart ones die out and don't reproduce?

(Btw you guys put up some new topics lar... boring leh, not many topics to discuss.)

Let me guess, you saw Idiocracy as well, didn't you?

Stephen Hawkings has three kids ,
don't judge his fertility by his disability

This post has been edited by ComposMentis: Jun 1 2010, 02:06 PM

that is just because hundred year ago only intellectual read newspaper so only serious paper doing serious reporting are on sales, but improved education mean everyone can read, so tabloid become the top seller, because it is the kind of "news" the average people are really interested in.

This post has been edited by robertngo: Jun 1 2010, 02:03 PM

i dont doubt this, bcoz i can see more and more similar threads in lyn...

if all are "smart" breed then who exactly is smart?

ts, lolz!

The correlation between the intelligence of parents and their children is questionable. What matters most is the environment and education that a child receives.

A child "born" with a brilliant IQ won't go far in an environment where he has no room to grow, on the other hand a child of "average" intelligence, allowed to learn and experience the world, can achieve much more.

To talk about "dumb" people outbreeding the so called "intelligent" is not well thought out, to say the least.

As such, TS, I don't think you're all that smart.

This post has been edited by lycaphim: Jun 1 2010, 02:42 PM

i think the number of stupid people remain the same as usual, just the communication technology we have now mean we heard from these people much more that usual, one hundred years ago we only read about the idea of smart people in books, now every tom d*** and harry have blog and facebook and twitter and made all kind of stupid post. also tv are dumb down to include a lot of stupid people doing stupid stuff.

the irony of the subject title makes me laugh

lol
no one is really that smart
it is that he is being too particular

Haha, I sure did.

Glad you saw the joke.

On a slightly related note, a certain religion is taking over the world through sheer birth rates.

I am growing stupider every second. As result I do not have the ability to put up new topic that is interesting.

I think I am not the only one. When technology increases we had to catch up with it. Technology is increasing faster than we can learn it. As a result we are stupider

On a more serious note, one real implication of the shrinking intellectual pool is seen in how a society like America developed after their civil war. You see periods of time a population of high intellect is managed by someone of mediocre intellect, with deadly consequences that will take generations to undo.

This sort of ties in with my other threads about AI/robotics and the human killing machine in a scenario where people of mediocre intellect are more keen to press the nuke button than, say, someone like Sir Isaac Newton. Well maybe we'll never see an intellect run a nation. That's why they're smart. But with a sizeable per capita number of intellectuals, the theories of Hamilton and Dawkins suggest a moderating influence that lowers the likelihood of society developing self-destructive characteristics.

Put another way, the lower the number of intellectuals per capita, the lower the likelihood you'll find one in a position to influence tech development positively. This shrinkage reaches a tipping point and triggers a precipitous a brain drain. Societies become intellectually polarized, leading to a situation that we have today where the rich nations become richer and poor nations become poorer.

I'm just looking at this from a behavioural/social science perspective not political and trying to see how the lines might move forward in the two directions - one with intelligent machines and one without.

---

Added on June 1, 2010, 4:14 pmNo lar.... from the comments I know the seniors here all clever clever one. Dun be shy.

This post has been edited by Beastboy: Jun 1 2010, 04:16 PM

Einstein does have kids. His son was a professor. Do your homework properly.

Really? Thanks for the tip!

Intelligent does not equal to wisdom. You said so yourself. Now you are getting confussing. As it is I am growing stupider already. You have to add to it by confussing me

True. Intellectuals grow old & I am banking on the hope old intellectuals have a higher chance of turning wise than old fools.

Now tell me, "is there a corelation between wisdom and intellect" ?