Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfgang  |
Scary what we think we should be able to control. But on that same note (just playing devils advocate here, I don’t actually believe it) couldn’t you build a better society in the long run? Yeah yeah.. ok its cruel to not let people have kids. Isn’t it cruel that I have to pay (taxes or whatever) to help raise them? Isn’t it cruel to the children who are born with sever problems? Isn’t it cruel that we use medical research dollars to find cures or whatever for genetic problems that could possibly be eliminated instead of focusing money on factors we can’t control as well? It is right that we torture and kill animals for illnesses we could have prevented?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dannyboy1 What do you think about the theory that smart people (higher IQ) less kids while people who aren't (lower IQ) have a bunch of kids they don't even know how to raise. The theory is, because of this, eventually the genetic gene-pool will have so many more dumb people, it will bring down the intelligence of the human race. It's just a theory I heard. |
This is a very interesting topic. I actually made this observation myself a couple years ago. Then I heard the song evolution by korn (you can watch the music video on youtube) and it is all about this same thing. Basically that lower income and lower intelligence are having kids at a higher pace then people with higher incomes and higher IQs.
This is an interesting article on IQs,
Definition of IQ which does not touch exactly on this, but circles around the issue a bit.
There has been lots of studies that link high IQ to high income and low IQ to low income.. however there have been lots of studies that say it does not matter at all. My personal thought is that it does correlate but is not a cause and effect.
Here are a couple quotes for the article I sited above (and yes I am coming around the whole broken genetic gene pool thing)
Quote:
In his book, "Straight Talk About Mental Tests", The Free Press, A Division of the Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc., New York, 1981, pg. 12, Dr. Arthur Jensen cites the following four IQ thresholds:
(1) An IQ of 50 or below. This is the threshold below which most adults cannot cope outside of an institution. They can typically be taught to read at a 3rd or 4th grade level. However, they cannot normally function in the customary classroom setting, and they require special training programs.
(2) An IQ between 50 and 75. At this level of intelligence, they generally cannot complete elementary school. Most adults will need smarter help in coping with the world.
(3) An IQ between 75 and 105. Children in this IQ range are not generally able to complete a college prep course in high school.
(4) An IQ between 105 and 115. May graduate from college but generally, not with grades that would qualify them for graduate school.
(5) An IQ above 115. No restrictions.
For IQs in these ranges, the influence of IQ upon socioeconomic sttus is dramatic. 31% of those with IQs below 75 were on welfare, compared with 8% of those in the 90 to 110 IQ interval, and 0% in those with IQs above 125. 55% of mothers with IQs below 75 went on welfare after the birth of the first child, compared with 12% of those with IQs between 90 and 110, and 1% of those with IQs above 125. Income is highly dependent upon IQ up to an IQ-level of about 125.
"People with IQs between 75 and 90 are 88 times more likely to drop out of high school, seven times more likely to be jailed, and five times more likely as adults to live in poverty than people with IQs between 110 and 125. The 75-to-90 IQ woman is eight times more likely to become a chronic welfare recipient, and four times as likely to bear an illegitimate child than the 110-to-125-IQ woman."
For IQs below 120, IQ is the best predictor of socioeconomic status of any psychometric measurement. In more complex jobs, IQ is better than even education or experience at predicting job performance.
|
Now, I in no way can claim that I know everyone in the world or even 1 percent of the world. However, I can say from my experience, the people who I consider to be intelligent have less kids then people I know who I wonder how they manage to breath without help.
I also notice when I meet the kids of “smarter” parents, the kids tend to be smarter. I don’t really mean grades smarter, I mean the contribute more to society. They may contribute just by working 9 to 5 but at least they aren’t pulling welfare. Kids of parents that are not so “smart” tend to follow in their parents footsteps. Maybe this is learned behavior or genetic IQ.. I could not tell you (tho I do have opinions
).
There are sometimes dumb kids from smart parents and smart kids from dumb ones.. I am just talking correlation here.
I found this interesting article.. it is dated, but it references birth rates and IQ
Study
The chart shows that the higher the IQ the smaller families they have.
Also here is another good study reference and much more recent.
This is from
Birth Order and Intelligence Quote:
What about family size?
This is a sticky issue: Although birth order wasn't related to IQ, family size was. For many years, social scientists have observed that there is a relationship between larger family size and lower IQ when you look at large-scale population studies. (Much of this research is reviewed in Family Size and Intelligence, a 1989 book by Judith Blake.) Of course, many people from very large families have high IQs, and there are plenty of people from smaller families who don't! It is only when scientists take a few giant steps back and look at whole populations or groups of populations that the association becomes meaningful. When it comes to your colleagues and friends, or your own family, all bets are off!
How can you explain the apparent fact that, on average, children from larger families have lower IQs? One theory, which makes some sense to me, has to do with social class. Social class and its extremes--wealth and poverty --are a hard reality in the United States and in most other places in the world. Parents from lower social class backgrounds tend to have larger families (perhaps in response to higher infant mortality; as infant mortality in a culture drops, so does the number of births.) Children growing up in poverty tend to have lower IQs (again, on average; many very brilliant people started life in poverty). So, on the population level, social class might be the link between larger family size and lower IQ. Does this mean that people who choose to have larger families are condemning their children to have lower IQs? Of course not!
|
I am not worried about the gene pool. Honestly, And this is probably pretty bad, but I will say it anyway.. If the gene pool does in fact go down hill.. one of two things will happen.
1) the bright what is left will rise up and try and turn society around or attempt to. The few smart will be unable to care for all the not smart and the not smart will decrease in numbers. (not smart people may be able to have children, but without brains for food etc, they wont survive)
2) We all die out of our own stupidity and then we would have earned our fate.
However, I don’t think those are likely. As many people who are being created that not as bright, there are people who are create that are bright.
I think part of our problem is not applying the survival of the fittest concept. Weather you agree with Darwin on evolution or not.. Survival of the fittest is only a small part. Basically it says, the strong, the fit, the smart, survive.. and the create children who are smart and fit and smart or else those children would die as well. I am not saying we should kill everyone stupid or anything. I just mean we have created a world where you can be a complete leach, suck humanity dry, consume a ton, and be weak and create a lot more little copies you to do the same. In days gone by, you would have died. No days, people are chastised for even thinking that people should have to carry their own weight.
What I am aiming for is that the level of consciousness rises enough that we can help pull up other people. I think highering the level of contributes of the planet would fix a lot of our problems including a lot of this one.
Ok, That was really long! If anyone made it to the bottom.. wow.
The thing is.. i could probably write a whole lot more!
Adrienne
