Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Gib Bogle who wrote (3189)	1/10/2006 3:11:24 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 219451

<The only way _mean_ intelligence can increase is by selection. There are no significant selection pressures on the human species in this phase of our evolution.> I'm finding this boring too Gib. Let's just leave it as you say, that there's no selection pressure and women don't select men according to intelligence. Guys get any girl they like. Even at IQ 50, 60, 70, guys can get a girl to bear their children. It's purely random these days, with no selection pressures. The Flynn Effect is something we should just ignore. Right, that's dealt with. Onward, Mq PS: You must have only read part of the amazing Mq Theory on the Evolution and Selection of Human Intelligence <If anything, according to your own beliefs there should be a lowering of the mean, a slight effect resulting from the tendency of the wealthier (and according you, more intelligent) to have fewer offspring. > Detailed study of my theory will show that I really think that guys in the low IQ department have trouble finding somebody to propagate their DNA. With them going missing every generation [and don't forget the Darwin Awards], there is distinct upward pressure in intelligence. Over and out.

To: Gib Bogle who wrote (3189)	1/10/2006 8:27:30 AM
From: elmatador	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 219451

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.