Correct me, please, if I'm wrong: You imply that the less intelligent are weeded out, resulting in a higher pool of more intelligent people who survive.
I picture a guy 10.000 years ago. He wouldn't need a higher level of intelligence to survive, thus avoiding extinction. Brute force would assured his survival and passing in on his genes onwards.
I picture me next to this guy beside me, I had no brute force. But I could articulate a way to get what the food, vegetables, materials, type of abode that we needed. Because I was able to read wind, time of the day, place to get animals or choose plants to climb or dig for, or how to protect from the environment.
Not only the brute force guys were need to get the animals by muscle power, if someone tried to get what we had, the guy with brute force was necessary to break the bones of our common antagonists who came to take what we got. Or to quiet down an internal dispute.
Both of us survived and were necessary, else they wouldnl't be here today.
Until 200 years ago the picture changed -scientific progress arrived- to the advantage of the intelligent and to the detriment of the brute force guys.
We have had only 200 years to re-arrange the chairs around the table. Sucess, now, depends on how better one make use to available scientific knowledge.
No need for large territory. Powerful armies or natural resources. The most effective use of knowledge defines who wins.
Success defined as best use of knowledge, and to use knowledge one has to have more brain power, is a factor that points to development of high and higher IQ across the whole population.
|
