Slashdot Mirror
The Role of Human Culture In Natural Selection
gollum123 writes with this excerpt from the NY Times: "... for the last 20,000 years or so, people have inadvertently been shaping their own evolution. The force is human culture, broadly defined as any learned behavior, including technology. The evidence of its activity is the more surprising because culture has long seemed to play just the opposite role. Biologists have seen it as a shield that protects people from the full force of other selective pressures, since clothes and shelter dull the bite of cold and farming helps build surpluses to ride out famine. Because of this buffering action, culture was thought to have blunted the rate of human evolution, or even brought it to a halt, in the distant past. Many biologists are now seeing the role of culture in a quite different light. Although it does shield people from other forces, culture itself seems to be a powerful force of natural selection. People adapt genetically to sustained cultural changes, like new diets. And this interaction works more quickly than other selective forces, 'leading some practitioners to argue that gene-culture co-evolution could be the dominant mode of human evolution.'"
Too bad smarter people tend to breed less. "Liberalism, atheism, male sexual exclusivity linked to IQ"
You can always hope the current crop of Religious Neanderthals will be bred out as their namegivers had.
.
Trolling is a art,
just wait until it becomes culturally acceptable to intentionally modify our genes using technology.
Lactose tolerance, amylase, hairiness... all functions of environmental pressure FFS. Of course environmental conditions have an influence on this "culture" they talk about.
Set your phasers on "funky"!
First culture is a meme post.
Culture is a parasite and the host is people.
It just wants to propagate itself.
So does this mean that the Chinese should be more inclined to do well in tests?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_examination
Circa 605 AD
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_evolutionary_synthesis
The write up is misleading on many levels, and reflects a very nineteenth century understanding of evolution. Fitness criteria are constantly changing, and success changes the fitness landscape. Of course culture will impact evolution. The idea that it could somehow protect from selection pressures is just silly. Culture may protect you from the cold, by giving you a fur coat. Or you could evolve a fur coat, but would you then claim that the fur coat protected you from selection pressures and 'slowed down' evolution? Evolution isn't going some place, it doesn't have a direction, so it is a bit misleading to talk about how fast it is going.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
Culture cannot play a role in natural selection, by definition. It does play a role in selection and evolution. That role is known as cultural selection.
My kids inherited my 'gaming' gene.
Notice the phrasing "gene-culture coevolution" is consistent with Dual-Inheritance theory which considers cultural (behavioural) transmission as an evolutionary process on its own. This can also be extended with Epigenetic mechanisms and Symbolic transmission modes. Technology evolves too and seems like a sensible extension. Its not so far fetched when you consider that Reproduction (or amplification in the continuous case), Variation and Selection are sufficient conditions for evolution. Keep in mind cultural evolution is Lamarckian though... and different in many other ways too.
If the placebo effect is so powerful (and it does appear to be - google for examples), being an atheist would make taking advantage of it less convenient and easy.
In contrast, groups of people who believe in some unseen being that helps them, won't need another person to actually give them the "sugar pill", they can more often self-administer it. This can help the survival of their group.
I suggest that this might affect the "natural selection" too.
If the costs (too many human sacrifices, too much killing etc) of the religion/culture outweigh the advantages then the religion/culture then that group is less fit than other groups and is more likely to vanish.
That said there may be advantages to Atheism. Some claim "clear thinking" (e.g. more rational), but there are still plenty of atheists who aren't that clear headed. Perhaps we'll see over a few generations if the alleged higher proportion in "clear thinkers" is such a significant advantage to the group.
Wherever progress is to ensue, deviating natures are of greatest importance...
The strongest natures retain the type, the weaker ones help to advance it...
To this extent, the famous theory of the survival of the fittest does not seem
to me to be the only viewpoint from which to explain the progress of strengthening
of a man or of a race. (Uncle Friedrich)
for public or private resources
the ultimate effect of a conservative ideology is a third world country: a rich upper class of a few, and a vast underclass of poor
there is no room for the middle class in conservative ideology. this includes no room for middle class idiots who believe the corporate propaganda about "evuls socialisticisms". some people are their own worst enemy
the money you have in your pocket is an abstract expression of the wealth of the society you live in. if you do not invest in your society, the money in your pocket loses value. if you invest in your society, you are paid dividends of a richer society, which pays you back with more business opportunities, etc
"but dem freeloading welfare queens..."
oh shut up retard. take a look at denmark someday. tell me they aren't happier healthier and wealthier than the average american. and then take a look at their tax rate
i'd rather be taxed to high hell than worry about declaring bankruptcy if i get cancer
but the conservative answer about a rising poor underclass (made up of previous middle class people) is to buy more guns
the greatest irony/ tragedy/ comedy is how many previously lower middle class people who are now the new american poor (because of conservative initiatives like gutting depression era financial protections that created the real estate bubble) support with such rapturous passion the gutting of social safety nets that only exist to serve them. some people are full of so much stupidity and hatred- for their own neighbors, their own society, and their own government, that they only destroy themselves
but i'm not going to let the morons take us all down. and if you read my words and agree with me, roll up your sleeves: there is a real life zombie apocalypse of propagandized retards out there, and we need to fight them to save our country from their self-destructive conservative stupidity
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
From TFA:
Most people switch off the gene that digests the lactose in milk shortly after they are weaned, but in northern Europeans -- the descendants of an ancient cattle-rearing culture that emerged in the region some 6,000 years ago -- the gene is kept switched on in adulthood.
Like, totally.
See? Hitler WAS right after all. There ARE Superior humans, and they are North Europeans.
Or is it actually more like their milk-gene is stuck, unable to switch off later in life?
So Hitler was actually wrong, because North Europeans are unable to alter their DNA, but he was right because that genetic "flaw" makes them superior cause they can feed off a cow for longer than the humans that can't eat milk products?
No... wait... I got it...
Nicholas Wade (The author of TFA) thinks that "enzyme" and gene" are the same thing.
That's it. Yet another mystery solved. Thanks to my superior genes.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
nt
Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
the nobel prize winner, john eccles - brain neurologist considers the known/experienceable world to actually be comprised of three 'worlds' -- i) that of matter, ii) that of states of consciousness, and iii) objective knowledge -- 'the sum total of human culture':
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Eccles_(neurophysiologist)#Philosophy
there is not only an evolution of the physical human form, but also an evolution in the states of consciousness mankind has achieved in order to attain to the states of consciousness which prevail in order to, for example make scientific and logical judgements -- evolution of consciousness, and its consequences must be taken be taken into account, because all that you see as the effects of HUIMANS -- cities, bridges, buildings -- is all due to a change in the consditions of consciousness that humans have developed.
in fact, the social organization may be more important than the material organization. there are enough physical resources and technological expertise on this planet to feed every woman, child and man on this planet -- given that we are adequately socially organized -- this is not yet the case, so war and poverty are not necessarily a lack-of-resources issue -- but a social one.
2cents from toronto island
jrp
What else explains why all little Chinese girls are born knowing how to play classical Piano?
(I kid, I kid)
Seriously though, this does seem rather obvious. People who cannot keep up with societies expectations do not have as much luck breeding. Duh.
Need help treating your acne? Come here!
Comment removed based on user account deletion
My son inherited my 'resist authority' gene.
I'll continue to pay for that one.
"Lame" - Galaxar
Another example of a non-religious topic being highjacked for the sake of attacking religion. You are no better than a theist/atheist fundamentalist that relentlessly attacks every idea that does not agree with thier own.
In Russia the culture evolves you. Karma whoring is the oldest profession.
Sometimes the obvious just sits in front of your nose and you can't see it, even with a room full of PhD's. Mankind domesticated Sheep, Dogs, Cattle, Horses, pigs, and Chickens, all resulting in a diverse array of sub-types and phenotypes. Low and Behold, the very first species that we domesticates was Mankind itself...
Why do they think that Water Buffalo and Elephants can drink from Savana Mud and water holes, but humans would die in if they did so weeks...
Wow...mankind's evolution is influenced by mankind's culture and breeding selections. Big surprise but it is OBVIOUS. Even birds self select for color and such..
This was hotly discussed with the OLPC debates and I'll quote this:
In response to many of the questions regarding the changes in the
OLPC project, and specifically the decision to base the project at
this juncture to a Microsoft Operating System, proponents of this
change have come out swinging against Free Software developers who
have worked for the current Free Interface, code named Sugar. A
large segment of the critique of the against Free Software developers
like Bender is that they have put their "Open Source" agenda above the
welfare of the project. Others claim that the "Open Source" advocates
should be pleased with the what has already been done and that the
project as it stands can either be relaunched or has already met
goals.
The problem, though, is that in many ways, the marketing and financial
positioning of the OLPC program is harder to develop then the hardware
and software. And the goals that have been met are small in light of
the original mission of the OLPC project.
An operating system is more than a commodity. It becomes the looking
glass that develops how the user thinks and it literally shapes
the mind of it's users. A system which is at it's core designed to
disenfranchise users from the learning experience, especially in how
the user views the software itself through learned expectations, and
forces information access through monopolistic channels and filters,
undermines the development of critical thinking skills. In geek terms,
the operating system reprograms the end user. The Microsoft operating
system is designed to do so from the ground up. It is in fact the only
intended use of the Microsoft Windows Operating System franchise.
The interaction between technology on human and societal development
dates to the beginning of civilization, if not even before that.
One interesting scholarly article on the topic which is archived at
http://www2.mrbrklyn.com/resources/technology_changes_how_we_think.txt
by Robin Wilson explores how the Gutenberg printing printing press causes
an explosion of mathematical usage and development, and how a large part
of that was developed by the standardization of mathematical symbols
for universal communication and expression.
" Johann Gutenbergâ(TM)s invention of the printing press (around 1440)
revolutionised mathematics, enabling classic mathematical works to be
widely available for the first time. Previously, scholarly works, such
as the classical texts of Euclid, Archimedes and Apollonius had been
available only in manuscript form, but the printed versions made these
works much more widely available.
At first the new books were printed in Latin or Greek for the scholar,
and many scholarly editions appeared. The earliest printed version
of Euclid's Elements, published in Venice in 1482, and there is an
attractive 1492 edition of Ptolemy's Almagest. Apollonius's Conics
appeared in 1537, and seven years later the works of Archimedes were
published in both Latin and Greek, and there was a celebrated edition
of Diophantus's Arithmetic in 1621, reissued in 1670, with the Greek
text, a Latin translation by Bachet, and comments by Fermat, including
his famous marginal comment on the 'last
http://www.mrbrklyn.com/amsterdam.html http://www.brooklyn-living.com
"If a narrow definition of genocide is used, as favoured by the international courts, then during the Srebrenica massacre between 8,000 and 9,000 men and boys were murdered and the remainder of the population (between 25,000-30,000, women, children and elderly people) was forced to leave the area. If a wider definition is used, then the number is much larger ....."
- Bosnian Genocide
-kgj
And we still can't run an advanced economy without bubbles?
Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
translated into reality
but the simple truth is that those who say dismissively "charity will take care of it" don't actually give to charity
such that the giving must be compulsory, for the sake of those who don't understand they are part of a society, they derive their income from a healthy functioning society, and so must be compelled to pay the maintenance they owe but don't understand. their animosity towards this compulsory payment is not derived from a superior way to run a society, but a simple stupid, shortsighted selfishness to not contribute. of course, plenty of them DO have "ideas", which when analyzed boil down to nothing more than "i got mine, fuck you" to the point of destruction of the society that sustains them: just because you believe you are an island doesn't mean you actually are one
if the contribution is voluntary, very few give, and you get a third world hell hole. i don't know why people can't see this simple truth
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
most women would have DDD breasts and men would have penises that hang to the knee...
I still cannot find the droids I am looking for...
It's not just humans impacts on themselves. Humans have become 'superpredators' speeding up the evolution of the species they hunt and harvest at rates far above what is found in nature. Hunting techniques such as bagging the biggest trophy animal to commercial fisheries where mesh openings in nets capture the largest while allowing the smallest to escape has impacted the natural selection process. Removing the strongest and biggest species from the gene pool has resulted in offspring characteristics such as reduced body size and lower reproductive age.
More info from this article
Not since FDR, at least. Now we are filling the population with people with genetic illnesses - saving any person we can regardless how their eventual reproduction will just make us weaker as a species. Both physically and intellectually. In addition, government is now dictating diet regardless of what an individual needs/wants, and to accommodate for those with allergies or other health problems. Brave New World has transformed from a fictional warning to future generations to a 'how to" manual...
Yes, yes they can. Plants in particular have crazily complex mechanisms for enabling/disabling genes (since that's pretty much the only way they can adapt to changing environments). But animals do it too.
The enzyme that allows you to digest lactose is a protein, lactase. This protein is coded for by a particular sequence of DNA. Another sequence of DNA controls whether or not the first sequence is active and producing the enzyme it codes for.
Traditionally the lactase gene is disabled after weaning. But then a mutation arose in the lactase-gene-controlling-gene, and for people with that mutation the gene stays activated.
So the description quoted is pretty much accurate. No the gene doesn't directly dissolve lactose, it just produces the protein that does it, but it's the gene itself that is affected by the mutation that causes it to stay "switched on" into adulthood.
The enemies of Democracy are
too depressing all the questions about the movie when i don't have time to finish it
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
how the average lower middle class person is supposed to pay for healthcare in this country
the conservative answer is "shut up and get busy dying"
you don't have an answer beyond that, and it makes my blood boil. the cost of a sick society is much higher than the cost of a health care system which is attuned to taking care of people, rather than raping them for profit
"the ultimate effect of a conservative ideology is a third world country: a rich upper class of a few, and a vast underclass of poor"
The ultimate effect of a liberal ideology is a third world country: a rich elite ruling class of a few, and a vast underclass of dependents of the state.
can you point to such a society for me please? this is a pleasant fiction to support your bankrupt thinking, as this country doesn't even exist
meanwhile, i can point to many countries without a strong central government which naturally gravitate towards a rich upper class and the vast majority being poor. i don't understand why you cannot see that without strong functioning social nets this is the inevitable result of your ideology. how many examples of how many third world countries with weak central governments and no protections do you want? and yet this third world status quo is EXACTLY what you are arguing for. can you not see the obvious result of your ideology?
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Fullness of ego can make scientists full of beans. The experts making this claim seem to suffer from the belief that humans are evolving. In fact a strong argument can be made that humans are in devolution. Like some bacteria humans tend to destroy their sustenance as they supposedly evolve. Yet when we are done destroying all that is around us we will pass just as that colony of bacteria does. When we stop having too many offspring,too much pollution, and endless wars, perhaps then we can consider humans as an advancing species. As it is we are essentially waging war in a larger and larger garbage and sewage dump.
Primates evolved trichomatic eyes to find fruit better. Most mammals are dichromatic. Now humans eat more meat, cooked food, more starch from grains and more dairy from cattle. Each diet change affected the genes . One could argue the next stage- hyper nutrition and processed food- selecting against humans with metabolic disease like diabetes, obesity, and bad hearts. This was very interesting article.
How are books, movies, television, computer screens, phones, etc. affecting humans? Humans are becoming more nearsighted. The incidence of nearsightedness has increased from 25% in the mid-20th century to 40% now. There probably wasnt much of it in the pre-literate era.
I wonder if we more actively evolve connecting communications and media directly to the brain and nervous system. Will we develop hive minds then like the Borg?
Those who survive the first bubble are those who are good in surviving bubbles. For those who are good in surviving bubbles, bubbles are an advantage because it eliminates the competition which is worse at surviving bubbles, but might be better otherwise. Therefore it is advantageous for those who survive bubbles to create more bubbles.
SCNR
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
yet our species has continued to improve technologically and the average IQ has continued to rise
A rising tide lifts all boats.
We're doing better because of health improvement. If not for that, IQ would be dropping by 1 to 2 points per year on an unchanging (not renormalized) scale.
We can't keep up the health improvement forever. We took lead out of our paint and fuel, we got rid of starvation, we got rid of many childhood diseases, and... now what? There isn't much room to improve.
Think how much better off we'd be without the idiocracy effect. Smart people mostly stopped having kids 50 years ago. Imagine a country of people with IQ 150, not counting renormalization.
So let me get this straight... This paper says that evolution (the process of a population adapting to its environment through generations and selection) causes the population to adapt to their culturally defined environment?
Call me shocked.
First, forget the "thousands of years". Effective birth control started with the pill, about 50 years ago.
Second, you're ignoring the general improvement in human health. (diet, lead removal, disease, etc.) In the short term, this will easily hide the genetic change.
Once we can't make any more significant progress in general human health, you'll start to see the decline. It takes generations of course, so you'll just barely see it if you're young enough.
Intellectual ability tops out around age 14. By your calculation, somebody 28 years old normally gets an IQ near 50. Worse, somebody smarter than a 14 year old has an undefined IQ because such intelligence is not achevied by a normal person even at infinite age.
The modern calculation is based in standard deviations from the mean. Unfortunately there is disagreement over the formula. Nearly all tests use 15 or 16 points per standard deviation, but Mensa's test uses 20 points per standard deviation.
Agriculture and human culture have had profound effects on the natural selection of other species. To wit: the individuals "fittest" for survival near humans are usually the tastiest, most docile specimens, and they are the ones that get (are forced) to breed. How long until Soylent Green is on the menu? ;)
Do any actual evolutionary scientists believe that humans stopped evolving at any point?
HIV alone is a direct example - many people world wide have died from this, but a small handful of people have been found to be resistant to it.
A classic (and sad) example of evolution at work.
A similar thing happened to North & South America when Europeans showed up with dozens of new diseases, wiping out a large percentage of the native population. (See "Guns Germs & Steel - an excellent read)
Bavarian Purity Law of Rice Krispie Squares: Rice Krispies, Marshmallows, Butter, Vanilla.
Been awhile since I tried slogging through Natural Selection, but the impression I got was the choicest survivability attributes may be fleeting things. On top of that, the sexual selection attributes might even conflict with survivability. So, you could be the moose with the prettiest antlers that get all the girls/cows, but you'd get locked up in brush and starve to death. Same thing with humans. The hottest girl you've ever seen might be too dumb to tie her shoe laces. How's that help further the species, besides making you extremely pleased during your breeding years? So, just because we've evolved some attributes or culture doesn't say a damned thing about how good it is for humanity either right now or in the long run. Chance seems to play a very large part in the game.
I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
It's like nobody remembers The Bell Curve
Proof that our IQ really is dropping?
I prefer rogues to imbeciles because they sometimes take a rest.
Take the example of teosinte (originally Zea mays parviglumis), a grass that has since evolved from a very fit organism to a biological freak: its reproductive organs are encased in a husk and located in a place that makes reproduction less probable unless it's mediated by another organism with opposable thumbs. Why did it evolve this way? Because humans really liked to kill the plant and eat its embryos, and thus wanted to ensure the survival of the species.
And while Zea mays parviglumis is still around, you're probably less likely to run into that plant than the more common mutant subspecies that humans evolved: corn.
" to have blunted the rate of human evolution, or even brought it to a halt, "
What? any evolutionary biologist who said that in the last 20 years should have there credentials revoked.
Technology and culture bring more options to the table.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
This has always been true, what is surprising is that it isn't obvious. Human 'culture' is as much a product of our evolution as our physical nature and the results are simply an extension of those changes. Thinking that culture is something 'other' than us or created by us is as silly as believing that conscience is something other than that which is supported by the physical context from which it arises.
I can't believe no one mentioned Prof. Freeman Dyson yet!
Many moons ago he wrote about how we should also include "external factors" which we inherit from a generation instead of only "internal factors" like DNA and such...
how this kind of shit keeps getting modded up. it has NO FUCKING RELEVANCE to the article being discussed.
Save the political debate for the flamebait articles please.
Of course culture affects evolution. Without going into the technical details which I am sure you all know, evolution is simply about death and birth. Culture has a huge affect on birth and death.
Why is it that so many news stories about scientific studies leave me thinking "Shit I could have told you that years ago." It saddens me that these people get paid far more than me to laboriously prove the obvious.
The core of this "news" item is already well-documented in canines. The development of the neural crest during fetal development and subsequent maturation is affected by not-so-subtle hormonal changes instigated by environmental changes from domestication during term. The neural crest affects the initiation, duration, completion, and other aspects of developmental processes. These include cartilage distribution and growth, gland development, and other aspects that definitively affect physical and behavior development. As we "domesticate" canines, they retain many characteristics that are exemplary of a wild puppy throughout their lives. As the domestication influence is removed, the neural crest changes revert and a normal wild adult will occur fully within two or four generations.
Even more interesting is that this domestication shift creates a developmental relationship that is "sticky", or stable. Many of the behaviors exhibited by domesticated animals are shown to domesticate offspring as well even with drastic reductions in domestication inputs from humans.
What this means is that the change towards domestication can occur rather rapidly, and the departure from domestication can be difficult at first but then very rapid after maternal behavioral inputs die off (hysteresis).
Why wouldn't this happen in humans as well? It is complete speculation on my part, but the sudden appearance of agriculturation and the lack of significant examples of a flow back to hunter/gathering once agriculturizaton has occurred seems to have similar characteristics.
but does anyone who is not brain addled and propagandized believe universal healthcare is anything remotely like north korea or cuba? thus the lies and demagoguery simple common sense faces
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
We are sicker than ever and prevalence of all major illnesses are growing
Here is just some scientific data:More premature babies surviving than ever. Over half of the premature babies that survived experienced serious health problems. A UK study of premature births, called EPICure, found children born very early often had learning difficulties as well as physical problems such as cerebral palsy, blindness or deafness. Researchers at the Oxford Centre for Health Economics estimate the cost of an average preterm baby is one and a half times more than a baby born full term. Professor Neil Marlow, who has been running the EPICure studies, said: "Even with better survival rates, the rate of morbidity, meaning problems that the babies have, is still very high.
Data from 10 regional registries of birth defects show that the incidence of Down syndrome among U.S. children increased by 31 percent between 1979 and 2003, from 9.0 to 11.8 per 100,000 live births.
Recent headlines from China are revealing a growing public health crisis: birth defects are up 40% since 2001
According to the March of Dimes, one in 33 babies born in the US have a birth defect -- about twice as many as China.
In the US, the total number of cancer cases has increased since cancer statistics have been kept. 12,769 deaths in 1900 (3% of total deaths), 158,335 cancer deaths on 1940 (11,3% of deaths), 553,768 in 2001 (23 of deaths)
Alzheimer's: The annual number of incident cases is expected to more than double by the midpoint of the twenty-first century: from 377,000 (95% confidence interval = 159,000-595,000) in 1995 to 959,000 (95% confidence interval = 140,000-1,778,000) in 2050. The proportion of new onset casess who are age 85 or older will increase from 40% in 1995 to 62% in 2050 when the youngest of the baby boomers will attain that age
Parkinson's disease is a growing national health problem. There are over 20 new cases diagnosed per 100,000 people annually ( Bernstein, 1995b). Most victims are over 40 years
old, although this disease has a form that can strike teenagers. Incidence of PD increase with the increase of longevity.
Multiple Sclerosis: M.S. affects 400,000 in the United States and 2 and half million people around the world. The overall prevalence estimate was 85/100,000 population, or approximately 211,000 (±20,000) persons. A 50% increase was observed in the number of women reporting MS for 1991 through 1994 vs 1982 through 1986. The observed trend in higher numbers of self-reported MS among women is consistent with recent observations of higher prevalence and incidence.
Prevalence of Genetic Conditions / Birth Defects
http://www.kumc.edu/gec/prof/prevalnc.html
As for intellectually, American grades are lower than ever.
Hoover Institution, Stanford University: "A science and math, American students trail those in other advanced democracies. The longer students are in school, the worse things get. Among fourth graders, U.S. students rank high on the International Test of Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS). Despite this head start, by eighth grade, American adolescents have slipped to the midpoint on the TIMSS; by age 17, their scores trail all but those in a few developing countries.
The United States is living on its past. Among the oldest group in the study (those aged 56–65), U.S. prose skills rose to second place. For those attending school in the 1950s, SAT scores reached an all-time high.
As the years go by, the United States slips down the list. Americans educated in the sixties captured a Bronze Medal in literacy, those schooled in the seventies got 5th place in the race. But those schooled in the nineties ranked 14th.
Education can contribute to IQ
Say what?
Remember that judge who tried to sue a little laundry shop millions of dollars?
Remember that professor who broke into his own home (by kicking the front door) and when the cops came to investigate he insulted the cop's mother?
Both examples above are people who are highly educated.
Where is your so-called "education contributed to IQ" bit ??
IQ is IQ, education is education, stop mixing up the two !!!
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
If you are paying for health insurance out of your salary and become too sick to work, where is your insurance? HINT: YOU'RE FUCKED! Make no mistake if this ever happens to you, your tune will change instantly. You just haven't thought it through nor do you recognize the tenuous nature of the current health-care (laughable) system.
Over-the-top Response Guy! Giving "Over-the-Top Responses" since 1970.
I don't think that you're the kind of "Conservative" that people rail against. I think you are a reasonable person and you and I would agree on many things and disagree on some.
Over-the-top Response Guy! Giving "Over-the-Top Responses" since 1970.
If you think about it, the main means through which evolution occurs is through genetic inheritance. These genes that are being passed convey information (instincts,growth patterns,timing) to help ensure the survival of a species. It shouldn't be at all surprising that as the amount of information needed to survive increases, that this is no longer adequate (for humans). Instead, we have developed our own method of information transmission (language and culture) that is faster and further reaching than anything DNA could hope to accomplish. There are many "natural" structures that humans have mimicked with technology and logic.
Like, isn't culture/behavior one of the traits that drives selection? It would be in any other species. One could go so far as to suggest humans causing another species to become extinct is simply natural selection. If some really efficient animal hunted and killed off another species, it would then need to find other prey or die out itself.