hippiedeath
Dead on the inside
- Jul 12, 2025
- 233
Will people continue to be stupid as mankind progresses? This is your call. Change or confirm our destiny with your vote. The time is now and now's the time. What time is it?
Dejected 55
Enlightened
- May 7, 2025
- 1,461
Someone the other day said something interesting about evolution that a lot of people get wrong. Most think of it as "survival of the fittest" but that isn't the whole truth. The whole truth is "survival of the fittest in a specific circumstance." Let me explain...
At some point way way way back in time... there some people who developed a natural immunity for a particular deadly disease. These people survived, others did not. Obviously those who didn't survive didn't pass on their genetics, so within a couple of generations you end up with pretty much all people being immune to that particular disease. Cool! But those people weren't necessarily the smartest. A lot of them may very well have been on average stupider than the people unfortunate enough to not have the natural immunity to that deadly disease... but being a genius didn't help them back then... so they died... leaving a mix of smart and dumb people.
Similarly... men whose children tended to survive the early years of childhood tended to produce boys who grew up to have more kids, since they actually survived the early childhood. These men, however, were not necessarily good fathers or even there at all. Hence, you can evolve a humanity where more kids survive on average over time BUT are less likely to be there and take care of their kids later. One evolutionary advantage doesn't not make you superior in all things.
The gist of the conversation was... you might possess a quality that made you more likely to survive early childhood BUT not necessarily live longer as an adult. These are two different things. Evolution tends to be about the best qualified to survive that moment. Now, these things can be additive over time of course... so surviving childhood means you have a better chance to be an adult... and then there's a chance for evolution to favor adults that survive those scenarios, and so forth.
BUT... there are a lot of things that don't necessarily represent an inherent advantage. Being smart, above a point, doesn't necessarily make you more apt to survive. Our world provides all kinds of scenarios for all levels of intelligence to survive. Sure, you might need more genius' to explore space... but you don't need that to survive... so average and below average intelligence can get a lot of people through the day... and so the genepool is going to reflect that since there's really no evolutionary advantage.
Basically, to circle back to the original question of the thread... there's nothing about the world that favors intelligence to survive over stupidity. As long as that is true, there will continue to be a lot of stupid people. In fact, there is a natural tendency for stupid people to reproduce more than intelligent people who might put it off until later or try to have fewer kids and so forth... so evolutionarily speaking, nature almost favors more stupidity than it does intelligence.
Tangentially related... I was reading once about someone interviewing a Park Ranger during a rash of incidences of bears ransacking the garbage cans in parks. The interviewer asked why they didn't make the garbage cans harder to get into, to prevent the bears from being able to get them open to get to the trash. The Park Ranger replied... "There is a surprising overlap between the smartest bear and the dumbest human." Reading between the lines... they tried making the garbage cans bear-proof but found that if they did that, they had a significant amount of people who couldn't operate the garbage cans and just dumped their trash wherever. Something to think about.
At some point way way way back in time... there some people who developed a natural immunity for a particular deadly disease. These people survived, others did not. Obviously those who didn't survive didn't pass on their genetics, so within a couple of generations you end up with pretty much all people being immune to that particular disease. Cool! But those people weren't necessarily the smartest. A lot of them may very well have been on average stupider than the people unfortunate enough to not have the natural immunity to that deadly disease... but being a genius didn't help them back then... so they died... leaving a mix of smart and dumb people.
Similarly... men whose children tended to survive the early years of childhood tended to produce boys who grew up to have more kids, since they actually survived the early childhood. These men, however, were not necessarily good fathers or even there at all. Hence, you can evolve a humanity where more kids survive on average over time BUT are less likely to be there and take care of their kids later. One evolutionary advantage doesn't not make you superior in all things.
The gist of the conversation was... you might possess a quality that made you more likely to survive early childhood BUT not necessarily live longer as an adult. These are two different things. Evolution tends to be about the best qualified to survive that moment. Now, these things can be additive over time of course... so surviving childhood means you have a better chance to be an adult... and then there's a chance for evolution to favor adults that survive those scenarios, and so forth.
BUT... there are a lot of things that don't necessarily represent an inherent advantage. Being smart, above a point, doesn't necessarily make you more apt to survive. Our world provides all kinds of scenarios for all levels of intelligence to survive. Sure, you might need more genius' to explore space... but you don't need that to survive... so average and below average intelligence can get a lot of people through the day... and so the genepool is going to reflect that since there's really no evolutionary advantage.
Basically, to circle back to the original question of the thread... there's nothing about the world that favors intelligence to survive over stupidity. As long as that is true, there will continue to be a lot of stupid people. In fact, there is a natural tendency for stupid people to reproduce more than intelligent people who might put it off until later or try to have fewer kids and so forth... so evolutionarily speaking, nature almost favors more stupidity than it does intelligence.
Tangentially related... I was reading once about someone interviewing a Park Ranger during a rash of incidences of bears ransacking the garbage cans in parks. The interviewer asked why they didn't make the garbage cans harder to get into, to prevent the bears from being able to get them open to get to the trash. The Park Ranger replied... "There is a surprising overlap between the smartest bear and the dumbest human." Reading between the lines... they tried making the garbage cans bear-proof but found that if they did that, they had a significant amount of people who couldn't operate the garbage cans and just dumped their trash wherever. Something to think about.
FadingSnowFake
Enlightened
- Nov 25, 2024
- 1,108
Stupidity seems to be in our genes and a part of mankind's destiny. And while the more intelligent may more likely choose not to reproduce, the not so intelligent may be more brave to pass on their genes.
It's difficult to tell- seeing as we have largely managed to evade natural selection as a species. We tend to try and ensure that all survive- including tge most stupid and, most have reproductive rights. There's no child support or social services in nature.
For humans though, I expect it will depend on how the future turns out. Exactly what jobs will AI take over and, what financial support will there be for wanna be parents? If we reach a stage where there isn't the financial support there for would be parents and, they know their child may not get a job- if they are struggling to- they may be put off. So- it maybe would depend on what kind of jobs/ opportunities are still avaliable to humans. Do they require high intellect?
Also, if the climate crisis accelerates, I tend to think that will put more people off. What are they bringing their child in to? Violent weather warnings every other week? 'Natural' disasters all over the place? I suppose you could argue that it's the smarter people who consider all that and the more stupid or at least- much more selfish who still think bringing more humans here is a good idea.
I tend to think life will continue in the same vein though- with knowledge easily at our fingertips. AI on hand to think for us. Entertainment on tap. I think we are a lazy but realistic species generally, so why will people bother to try and be clever if they know AI will beat them? Being bombarded with media I think has already mangled most of our attention spans.
It's hard to tell really. I'm sure there will still be outliers. The odd genius/ child prodigy here and there but my feeling for the majority of us, is that we'll continue to be dumber than our predecessors.
I remember having a similar discussion with my parents. That their exam papers- set at a similar age- were harder. I don't know if that's true but, if it is- that's a clear indication of lowering the bar! Presumably because so many were failing the more difficult paper.
I have a friend who teaches at degree level. Seeing as the responsibility to attend schooling lies with the student by that point and, seeing as their subject isn't one all the students warm to- it's like a compulsory module. They were saying, they're careful to give them lots of praise and not make it too difficult- in the hopes it will increase the chances of them simply attending!
I guess it varies really but, I think as a species we are maybe less respectful of authority now. I imagine lots of children don't even want to learn. It can be boring next to playing. So- that's another thing. Will non compliance with discipline sabotage us?
For humans though, I expect it will depend on how the future turns out. Exactly what jobs will AI take over and, what financial support will there be for wanna be parents? If we reach a stage where there isn't the financial support there for would be parents and, they know their child may not get a job- if they are struggling to- they may be put off. So- it maybe would depend on what kind of jobs/ opportunities are still avaliable to humans. Do they require high intellect?
Also, if the climate crisis accelerates, I tend to think that will put more people off. What are they bringing their child in to? Violent weather warnings every other week? 'Natural' disasters all over the place? I suppose you could argue that it's the smarter people who consider all that and the more stupid or at least- much more selfish who still think bringing more humans here is a good idea.
I tend to think life will continue in the same vein though- with knowledge easily at our fingertips. AI on hand to think for us. Entertainment on tap. I think we are a lazy but realistic species generally, so why will people bother to try and be clever if they know AI will beat them? Being bombarded with media I think has already mangled most of our attention spans.
It's hard to tell really. I'm sure there will still be outliers. The odd genius/ child prodigy here and there but my feeling for the majority of us, is that we'll continue to be dumber than our predecessors.
I remember having a similar discussion with my parents. That their exam papers- set at a similar age- were harder. I don't know if that's true but, if it is- that's a clear indication of lowering the bar! Presumably because so many were failing the more difficult paper.
I have a friend who teaches at degree level. Seeing as the responsibility to attend schooling lies with the student by that point and, seeing as their subject isn't one all the students warm to- it's like a compulsory module. They were saying, they're careful to give them lots of praise and not make it too difficult- in the hopes it will increase the chances of them simply attending!
I guess it varies really but, I think as a species we are maybe less respectful of authority now. I imagine lots of children don't even want to learn. It can be boring next to playing. So- that's another thing. Will non compliance with discipline sabotage us?
darksouls
Enlightened
- May 10, 2025
- 1,372
tercermundista
Member
- Apr 23, 2024
- 90
Similar threads
Politics & Philosophy
Eriktf
