Replies

“This conflicts rather dramatically with the records of actual IQ tests, which have been increasing steadily in what is called the Flynn Effect.”

That’s actually incorrect.

You see, the Flynn Effect is easily misinterpreted by people with little knowledge of the mathematics behind a normal distribution. Such misinterpretations are made worse by the heady, and beautiful egalitarian implications that the Flynn Effect would hold for our society and the world at large if it were indeed accurate AND was a trend that could be expected to continue indefinitely. To quote that bastard Lenin (the Brit, not the Russian) IMAGINE!

The simple fact is that if you look at the original data sets, you can see that the reported increases were chiefly confined to the lower half of the curve, and the upper end of the curve saw little significant increase. Such data would support a nutrition-based hypothesis for the observed effect - namely that post-war prosperity largely did away with childhood malnutrition and significantly reduced that factor’s influence on the intellectual development of generations of low-class individuals. Though a number of studies have tried to drive a stake through the heart of that idea and champion the ideal that human beings are infinitely plastic and interchangeable units entirely molded by their educational and cultural environments.

A recent Dutch study indicated that even that modest, low-end of the spectrum increase in IQ ENDED in the early 1990’s. Since that time averages have been falling. The possible causes are numerous, but assuming the new data is sound then the most likely initial suspects would be either dysgenic influence on the upper end of the curve, or possibly our modern education systems no longer offer any significant encouragement or challenges for the best and brightest, or perhaps a combination of those factors. Frankly, the Flynn Effect was widely misinterpreted during its heyday, and the Flynn Effect has long since stopped and has actively been backtracking.

Interestingly enough, common wisdom can provide an insight into such trends before the research journals catch a hint of it. How often have you heard, or even thought to yourself, that common sense was dying out? Well, in our society we have removed many of the historical impediments to genuine stupidity. In a world of litigious attorneys, victim advocacy groups, nanny-state government and non-judgmental education and employment policies, the simple fact of the matter is a greater number and greater percentage of stupid people are being employed, cared for, coddled, and allowed to live long and prodigiously “fruitful” lives.

For example, in ages past pouring boiling liquids on your genitals would stand a good chance of seriously reducing your employment and reproductive opportunities for life. Today, you can just sue a restaurant and get paid millions.

Regardless of whether such an influence might have an effect upon the gene pool the fact remains that when governments and societies subsidize a particular behavior you can expect more of said behavior. Likewise, when government penalizes a behavior by fining or taxing it, you can expect less of said behavior. At the end of the day, we really do subsidize stupidity and tax intelligence.

Thanks. Your points do not actually disagree with mine, which was that IQ tests have had to be recalibrated each decade since the 30s (which was about when they started being used widely).

You see, when I say “IQ scores,” that is exactly what I’m talking about. I’m quite agnostic on the issue of whether IQ measures “intelligence,” whatever that is.

It is reasonably obvious, at least to me, that a person’s potential IQ or intelligence is determined primarily by heredity. Environmental factors (nutrition, lead exposure, etc.) can easily keep a person from reaching that potential, but improving environment will quickly allow a person to reach full potential, and further environmental improvements will have little if any effect. This is similar to a person having genetic potential to reach a certain height, but that potential being easily stunted by environmental and other factor. Japanese people are today on average several inches taller than their parents or grandparents, almost certainly due to improved nutrition since WWII.

Also, I never claimed that the range of intelligence found in people was getting narrower, only that the average IQ was moving up.

Amd you may very well be correct that the effect is petering out and that improved nutrition, etc. is the reason. Certainly we’ve seen similar effects in average height, etc. Given the immensely improved economic conditions over the last few decades in most of the world (something nobody ever talks about), it is likely the effect will continue in much of the rest of the world for a few more decades and then start to taper off.

Eventually, we may have a world where most people reach something close to their full genetic potential, and then actual genetic differences between groups will be more readily discernible.