Are we evolving into smarter beings?

We are getting more and more techonologically advanced, but that doesn't mean that we're getting intellectually smarter. Sure, we do need knowledge to create these sorts of things, but it's all in teh books. No one had ever memorized how to do everything. When civilizaiton began to develop, writing was still primative, so they had to do everything by the spoken word of mouth. There was no where to write it, not at the very beginning at least, so it had to be remembered.

As our technology gets more and mroe advanced, we get more and more dependent. When we were still living in caves, we had to go out and hunt and kill for our food. Now we can just go to our supermarket. Then what would happen if the supermarket closed? The power went out, our fridge broke? Can you imagine living in this world today without any electricity? We've become so dependent on technology that if it was to be taken away from us, alot of us wound't survive.

Also, medical advances have made us weaker. The common cold wopuldn't kill us, but we'd have to endure alot of suffering if it wasn't for tissues and cold medicine.
Evolution and immunizationhas made us immune to most dieseases, but just imagine if the virus that causes it mutates into something that can get past our bodily defenses.

Yes. Technology has become something of a crutch. Worse than that. Thinka bout this:

Lysol claims to kill 99.9% of germs. What does that leave? the hardiest, most survivable germs. they procreate, leaving healthier, more robust children. This + antibiotics=uberviri.

We, however, dilute the gene pool with modern medicine.

DE

Originally posted by surfup
I accept not many people can survive in the open, but I'm sure we will learn, faster than our ancestors would if they were presented to our environment.

Back in Greece, think about the value of individuality and non-conformity. Most of the people followed others and didn't think for themselves.

Take for example ATS, most of people here fight ignorance. Not all but many. That number has increased, meaning we are getting smarter, right?

Well, not exactly I think.

If we were to all go back 300 years, instantly right now, I think that most sick and unstables, would perish. Then a large percent of starver's would perish. Violence would again be a method of survival. Few, strong, and stable people would survive. Yes we would live to maybe 40 again, and keep in mind if you spend much time trying to survive, you wont have much time to ponder the wonders of life, or anomolies.

And of followers, here and in ancient Greece,....

The ones with control, as keepers of knowledge, will be the kings wise men.

Here in ATS, much learning prevails, probubly moreso than teaching, and everyones curve of reasonable deduction and analysis, is at a different rate.

Remember the bell curve. 15.5% of people wouldn't survive, 68% would be peasants barely ekeing out a living, 13.5% merchants/tradesmen/assorted, 2% kings , nobles and wisemen. How many people would cut it to make the 2% on ATS?

DE

Originally posted by DeusEx
...15.5% of people wouldn't survive, 68% would be peasants barely ekeing out a living, 13.5% merchants/tradesmen/assorted, 2% kings , nobles and wisemen. How many people would cut it to make the 2% on ATS?

My point is that the 2% is higher than it was before! Meaning we are learning something - smart or not - we are learning!

Ummm.... two percent has NEVER, EVER changed. The bell curve is, was, and proably will be a constant for a long time to come.

DE

Originally posted by DeusEx
Ummm.... two percent has NEVER, EVER changed.

On what facts are the Bell Curve based on?

I would prefer to be a wiser peasant.

The bell curve is a constant. It's like the equivalent to pi in psych and sociology, especially considering IQ (intelligence quotient). IQ is determiend throguh 13 tests, ranign from spatial test to verbal ones. The scores are calculated and then averaged to show a person's IQ. When a group's IQ is taken, 68% of people fall between 1+/- standard deviance points of the average of the group. 13.5% of people on either end find themselves either a SDP above or below the average. 2% of people on either side fin themselves further. So, if you have a curve where the average score is 120, you'll still have the same curve if you take a different group where the average IQ is 40.

*gasps for breath*

I'm in Persigner's class. Look him up. He's a famous neuroscientist. he drills this into us.

DE

Word constant reminds me that you haven't found any other contradiction to the theory.

Thanks for the info, helped me a lot.

Just look up the bell curve and IQ tests, you'll see what I'm talking about...probably with a more rational explination from someone NOT cramming for midterms under a man who broke god and changed neuroscience.

DE

Yes, people are getting smarter, its easy to tell. Knowledge is increasing, but it will eventually increase so much that no one person can know all of it. Is the gene pool decreasing in quality? No. Our gene pool is getting better, we are breeding for what we are best at.

Originally posted by MrJingles
Yes, people are getting smarter, its easy to tell. Knowledge is increasing, but it will eventually increase so much that no one person can know all of it. Is the gene pool decreasing in quality? No. Our gene pool is getting better, we are breeding for what we are best at.

The human gene pool has forever been depreciating. Scientists track human beginnings by looking at races to find the ones with the most complete DNA. Plus chemicals, radiation (natural and otherwise) and poor habits and lifestyles, accellorate the breaking down of our gene pool.

Originally posted by MrJingles
Knowledge is increasing...

I accept.

Our gene pool is getting better, we are breeding for what we are best at.

Our gene pool isn't really getting better, in fact it is decreasing.

Originally posted by MrJingles
Yes, people are getting smarter, its easy to tell. Knowledge is increasing, but it will eventually increase so much that no one person can know all of it. Is the gene pool decreasing in quality? No. Our gene pool is getting better, we are breeding for what we are best at.

1. People aren't getting smarter, they just have access to more knowledge. They ability to adapt and create new ideas remains the same.

2.Name each and every person you knwo who's needed insulin, or antibiotics, or major surgery before oh, let's say thirty. DEAD, each and every one fo them. Yet, they continue to breed, passing on a genetic perpensity for those same conditions. It's sad but true.

3. Breeding people is what we're best as, but #ing it up comes a close second. Parkinson's disease is caused by the chem we put into ourselves. That's jsut one example.

DE

Originally posted by DeusEx
Parkinson's disease is caused by the chem we put into ourselves. That's jsut one example.

Think about the resistance we are building against diseases.

If we get one, we have to lose one.

Originally posted by surfup

Originally posted by DeusEx
Parkinson's disease is caused by the chem we put into ourselves. That's jsut one example.

Think about the resistance we are building against diseases.

If we get one, we have to lose one.

Yeah... we constantly play catch up to the problems we create, while natural problems get farther and farther out of reach because of that. Sure, we'll eventually build up various resitances, but expect culling. Severe culling.

DE

Originally posted by DeusEx
Yeah... we constantly play catch up to the problems we create, while natural problems get farther and farther out of reach because of that. Sure, we'll eventually build up various resitances, but expect culling. Severe culling.

This is the cause of the downfall of us and many civilizations.

One must realize that no one 'really' knows anything but what they think they know. To take opinion or stance subjectively is to isolate and separate from the infinite possibilities that surround our 'decisions.' Needless to say, the more one knows, the less free-thought they may find available to themselves. I say OBJECTIVITY!
At least you will always know where you stand. I also realized tha order is destruction. As one simplifies dimension on any construct or design, they are simplifying and 'fragmenting' a more dynamic whole from which any equation is borne from. Creation is chaotic as life is as well; order and symmetry are destruction as we break down complex matrices or synergy. Also as a side note: I have completed my papers on photonic-pathologies as I have learned to 'illustrate' my designated conceptuals rather than use sloppy mathematics to fumble around with basic physicality principles. I am not affording myself a pat on the back or pride I just have so much to share as I have seen sooo much in so little a time. Time travel is a trip!

I'm surprised no one has brought up the Darwin Awards, or maybe they just assume everyone's heard of them. I suppose we've hurt our DNA too much to just stop using our crutch, but by the time that we're almost screwed we'll most definitely be able to manipulate our DNA to the tiniest facet. What we need is free birth control, I think Canada did something like that, just like their heroin centers. Maybe it's morally wrong, but when you consider the alternatives, it's genious. Dumb people are constantly having sex because they don't have the capacity for any other type of entertainment. So rather than allow them to pass on their stupidity-genes, give them a way to have fun and erase their DNA from the gene pool. And overpopulation isn't good either, so it's win-win-win (fun, killing their DNA, population control) Somebody get right on that!