How Fragile Is Our Intellect?

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3c4TxciNeJZN0I0NzAzVU0zeDQ/view

by dredmorbius • 12 years ago

57 52 12 years ago

drive.google.com

dredmorbius11• 12 years ago

Interesting related concepts are the Flynn Effect (mentioned in the paper) and Jean Piaget's theory of cognitive development:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn_effect

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piaget%27s_theory_of_cognitive_...

ballstothewalls• 12 years ago

Out of curiosity, isn't it a violation of copyright to make an academic article from a paid database available publicly?

samclemens2• 12 years ago

Technically yes, but with the advent of academia.edu and the cratering public profile of for-profit academic publishers like Elsevier, it's becoming normal. In my field, at least, there's a perception that Elsevier and Wiley won't further damage their reputations by going after individuals posting papers (although I am surprised they haven't targeted Academia.edu as a whole).

Unrelatedly, the author's odd name "Michael Woodley of Menie" caught my eye. It would seem that he's the heir to a Scottish barony (Menie). I hesitate to even go there, but it's at the very least interesting that the (supposed) decline in general intelligence since the Industrial Revolution is being studied by an ancestral nobleman.

Edit: after reading the article and following up on the author's affiliation, the Ulster Institute for Social Research, this is definitely something to be taken with a grain of salt. The Ulster Institute has ties with "racialist" fringe scientists promoting what is essentially a 21st century take on eugenics. The paper is not necessarily inherently flawed because of this, but certain assumptions in it (like the uncited claim that lower socioeconomic classes have been historically correlated with lower g) seem fishy to me as a result.

mturmon2• 12 years ago

I have to agree that the whole concept of assessing population trends in "g" is pretty tainted at this point. For some reason, this subject tends to attract a certain kind of person with an axe to grind.

gexla• 12 years ago

yes

This answered the question.

dredmorbius11• 12 years ago

Do you have a specific reference to the fringe racist science at UISR? I am not familiar with the organization.

I do find associations with the Flynn Effect and via the Southern Poverty Law Center (a group focused on black rights and equality in the US) a biography on Richard Lynn:

http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-files/pro...

“I am deeply pessimistic about the future of the European peoples because mass immigration of third world peoples will lead to these becoming majorities in the United States and westernmost Europe during the present century. I think this will mean the destruction of European civilization in these countries.” —Interview with neo-Nazi Alex Kurtagic, 2011

More via Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Lynn

The source who tipped me off to this particular article is a UK psychologist who posts some interesting and occasionally provocative material on his blog.

dredmorbius11• 12 years ago

Updating my earlier response -- these aren't just "ties", the Institute was founded, and is headed, by a noted White Nationalist.

The source I'd picked up the item from is, it seems, quite the racist himself. I should have seen it earlier given the topics he covered and how he was doing so in his blog.

The area of research interests me, but I'm exceptionally dubious about this paper.

Oh, and Woodley appears to be the son of Michael Woodley, aerial effects coordinator for several James Bond films. The elder acquired the estate in 1995. So this doesn't appear to be old money, per se.

dredmorbius11• 12 years ago

On yet further research: the paper was produced by an academic with an affiliation at the Ulster Institute. To the best of my knowledge the paper is being hosted by Dr. James Thompson, who sits on the academic advisory council of that same institute. http://ulsterinstitute.org/

I've commented above on the nature and issues concerning the institute, in particular its ties with white nationalists, racists, eugenics proponents, neo-Nazis, and fascists.

hbdman• 12 years ago

There's your solution to the Fermi Paradox. If the IQ decline is on the order of 1.23 points per decade (with steeper drops on the right tail of the distribution), I can definitely see technological civilization becoming untenable in a few centuries and before we develop strong AI.

aaron6952• 12 years ago

I don't think so.

I'd guess the singularity is decades away not centuries.

Genetic engineering babies for higher intelligence is already here. But I'd guess it'll become more effective and common place in decades.

The intelligent tend to clump and interbreed. They breed less, so % might go down but numbers are probably relatively stable.

Add to this many counties like the billions in China currently don't have this problem atm. When they get their education system / poverty sorted they'll add huge numbers to last us out the centuries.

Plus I also think communal intelligence should not be under rated. Even if g drops, systems of group collaboration might keep the issue at bay.

Retra• 12 years ago

What does any of this have to do with a singularity?

dredmorbius11• 12 years ago

There are numerous other possibl explanations to the Fermi Paradox. I lean toward the Olduvai Theory myself: that high-energy technological societies are very frequently short-lived periods in a planet's evolution.

It's also quite possible that many worlds are far more prone to catastrophes than Earth. Which has had a few hard knocks of its own -- asteroid bombardment, toxic atmosphere, snowball Earth, hothouse Earth, supervolcano eruptions, climate change, more asteroid impacts, etc.

On a world where the system kept getting reset every few million years or so, it might be hard for advanced life, let alone civilization, to get off the ground.

thewarrior3• 12 years ago

I know I might downvoted for saying this but this paper is saying what many in favour of eugenics were saying at the beginning of the 20th century.

michael_storm• 12 years ago

Which has nothing to do with its validity. (And I don't necessarily agree with its conclusions myself.)

mturmon2• 12 years ago

But at this point, it's kind of like coming to a discussion of a perpetual motion machine "with an open mind".

dredmorbius11• 12 years ago

Edit: On further research, it appears you're pretty much precisely right. This is part of a White Nationalist group with strong ties to eugenics, fascist, neo-Nazi, and other racist organizations.

________________________________

(Earlier)

The notion of a weakening of intelligence or other traits is one that's been kicked around a lot over the years. You'll find it in movies like Idiocracy as well. It's definitely present in a lot of racist / white superiority writings over the years, and some comments below link the Ulster Institute for Social Research with racist fringe elements. I didn't know that when I posted this item.

Turns out that the Ulster Institute for Social Research is the creation of white nationalist Richard Lynn, and has some decidedly racist associations:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Lynn

Given that, I'd really be interested in seeing what those with actual backgrounds in genetics and intelligence have to say about the research and methods here.

thewarrior3• 12 years ago

Thought so.

This is a pretty risky thing for a mainstream scientist to say. Most of the people in the field would be terrified of publishing such a paper even if they believed in it.

But I'd be glad if someone knowledgeable could comment on the validity of the claims in the paper.

The idea that Eugenics might actually work is too disturbing to even consider.

applecore• 12 years ago

You would think that eugenics was thoroughly discredited during the twentieth century, but apparently we need a phrase that means the opposite of “throwing the baby out with the bath water”—unleashing a terrible negative upon the world in order to attain something desirable, but relatively minor and probably attainable by other means.

gizmo686• 12 years ago

Thankfully a horrible implementation of a concept does not completely discredit it forever.

mikeash4• 12 years ago

I nominate something like, "Swatting a fly with a nuclear bomb."

yummyfajitas2• 12 years ago

You'd be wrong. It's been proven highly effective for humanitarian purposes. It's also quite effective in animals.

https://www.jewishgenetics.org/dor-yeshorim

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog_breeding

Are you really arguing that the theory of evolution (which is all you need for eugenics to be scientifically valid) has been "thoroughly discredited"?

Note: Nazi science teaches us how to send a rocket to the moon, and also how to drop bombs on people. You don't need to declare rocketry as "discredited" to argue against dropping bombs on people.

GFK_of_xmaspast• 12 years ago

Check the references, he cites Cattell, about whom this was written: http://www.ferris.edu/isar/bios/cattell/genetica.htm

"""Cattell’s critical remarks about Hitler in later years trivialize the horrors of the past and the dangers inherent in fascist ideology. In Cattell (1972, p. 406), for example, he compares Hitler to "the murderous Hippie cults of California.""""

""" Despite this, Cattell could write in 1938 that the "envy" and "hostility" of the "Atlantic Democracies" over "the rise of Germany, Italy, and Japan," was uncalled-for. Citizens in these fascist states had "disciplined their indulgences" and focused their energies on "a religious purpose." The rise of fascist Italy and Nazi Germany "should be welcomed by the religious man as reassuring evidence that in spite of modern wealth and ease, we shall not be allowed to sink into stagnation or adopt foolish social practices in fatal detachment from the stream of evolution" (Cattell, 1938, p. 149). After five decades of reflection, Cattell has concluded that the legacy of this catastrophe has been a mental "disorder" he calls "ignoracism" - the inability "to consider the scientific possibility that races may show statistically significant differences" (Cattell, 1972, p. 262). In other words, the Nazis created such a revulsion to racism that it resulted in "ignoracism" - the refusal to accept the reality of racial differences! """

throwaway904462• 12 years ago

And how, exactly, is this relevant?

dredmorbius11• 12 years ago

It's relevant because I find I've posted a paper from a researcher associated with a strongly eugenicist, White Nationalist organization with ties to neo-Nazi and Fascist groups. I did not realize this when I posted the item.

dredmorbius11• 12 years ago

Good call.

I really didn't know these associations before posting this piece. I'm quite embarrassed.

dredmorbius11• 12 years ago

I'm regretting posting this, though I suppose it may well serve as an advisory and notice to others.

My source for the article is a UK psychologist, James Thompson, who'd been posting a few interesting and provocative bits of speculation on the Ebola situation. It seems he's got quite an interest in the works of one Richard Lynn, whose name appears in 65 postings to

https://encrypted.google.com/search?q=site:drjamesthompson.b...

So, who is Richard Lynn, you ask?

This is what the Southern Poverty Law Center, an American nonprofit civil rights organization noted for its legal victories against white supremacist groups, its legal representation for victims of hate groups, its classification of militias and extremist organizations, and its educational programs that promote tolerance, has to say about him, whom they describe as a White Nationalist:

For 50 years, Richard Lynn has been at the forefront of scientific racism. An unapologetic eugenicist, Lynn uses his authority as professor (emeritus) of psychology at the University of Ulster to argue for the genetic inferiority of non-white people. Lynn believes that IQ tests can be used to determine the worth of groups of people, especially racial groups and nations. The wealth and power of nations, according to Lynn, is due to their racial intelligence and “homogeneity” (or “purity”). He argues that the nations with the highest IQs must subjugate or eliminate the lower-IQ groups within their borders in order to preserve their dominance.

Mr. Lynn himself is quoted:

I am deeply pessimistic about the future of the European peoples because mass immigration of third world peoples will lead to these becoming majorities in the United States and westernmost Europe during the present century. I think this will mean the destruction of European civilization in these countries.

—Interview with neo-Nazi Alex Kurtagic, 2011

http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-files/pro...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Poverty_Law_Center

Michael A. Woodley of Menie's Google Citations pulls out any number of interesting titles:

"Inbreeding and national IQ revisited: Postscript to Woodley (2009)"

"Were the Victorians cleverer than us? The decline in general intelligence estimated from a meta-analysis of the slowing of simple reaction time"

"Political orientations, intelligence and education"

http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=mmoY0-kAAAAJ&hl=en

Woodley's own background is of some interest: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balmedie

I'm prepared to say at this point that the paper should probably be read with extreme skepticism. There may be merits to research in this area, but the affiliations of this researcher call into serious question any possible impartiality.

My apologies.

pippy• 12 years ago

Because civil rights groups don't like him, it doesn't invalidate his work.

mikeash4• 12 years ago

Conversely, just because something is published as a scientific paper doesn't mean it's worth the paper it's printed on.

userbinator• 12 years ago

to argue for the genetic inferiority of non-white people

I wonder if he considers Asians to be white.

bogodynamics5• 12 years ago

Paragraph 3 of his Wikipedia page reveals that he considers North-East Asians to be about 6 IQ points more intelligent than Europeans, based on a study he performed in the 1970s.

So he would appear not to be as uncomplicated a racist as the parent comment implied. Which is a blow, to be sure; but I imagine that if we sling enough mud, some will stick, so there's hope for our noble smear campaign yet!

samclemens2• 12 years ago

I don't think you need to apologize - it's an interesting case study of how the apparatus of a scholarly journal, an academic affiliation and scientific credentials can lead us in sometimes scary directions. Historians and philosophers of science are right: who funds social sciences research, and the backgrounds of those who conduct it, sometimes really does matter. Not in the sense of 90s debates about relativism, but in a more practical sense that research questions in the social sciences don't emerge out of a vacuum and often have political overtones. I think you're correct in suspecting that this is one of those cases.

To those who are saying that this particular paper isn't invalidated by unsavory ties: you're right. But like I pointed out below, there are uncited claims about low intelligence correlating to lower economic status in the early modern period in here that strike me as suspect given the wider context.

wavegeek• 12 years ago

the Southern Poverty Law Center, an American nonprofit civil rights organization

You seem to be trading one extremist group against another. the SPLC, whatever its origins (after the civil rights victories had been won) has morphed into a hybrid of an extreme left wing organization (they seem to never find leftists are hate groups, while anyone on the right seems to qualify) and a very very nice profit center for those who control it.

bogodynamics5• 12 years ago

the genetic inferiority of non-white people

The first sentence in paragraph three of his Wikipedia page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Lynn) states that an experiment he conducted in the 1970s revealed North-East Asian people to have IQs on average 6 points higher than Europeans.

Certainly an interesting position for a person who "argue[s] for the genetic inferiority of non-white people" to prominently advocate.

dredmorbius11• 12 years ago

And further: Thompson is on the advisory board of the Ulster Institute, listed on its homepage.

aaron6952• 12 years ago

Since there seems to be an attack on the source and not the science it is interesting that Jim Flynn (Flynn effect) does agree with the premise of dysgenics.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objecti...

(The contraception in the water supply he clarified later was a joke)

jostmey• 12 years ago

While I would not be surprised if Humanity is sliding downward, I am cautious about trying to draw conclusions about how evolution works. I feel that evolution works a little bit like that episode in South Park where the disabled turkey named Gobbles is the only turkey to survive the slaughter house because its neck is bent (reference http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helen_Keller!_The_Musical).

botman• 12 years ago

It's worth noting that embryo selection might be coming really soon http://nautil.us/issue/18/genius/super_intelligent-humans-ar... and that will have a much bigger influence on the evolution of human intelligence than any effects related to natural selection.

What worries me much more than dysgenic effects is the fact that people in western countries tend to have a strong aversion to any discussion of genetics and intelligence, which means that these countries may end up being late adopters of embryo selection or genetic engineering technology.

hackaflocka• 12 years ago

Please clarify:

In the third paragraph, should the word "complimentary" have been spelled "complementary"?

arximboldi• 12 years ago

I find interesting that while the issue about the connection between race and IQ has been widely commented here, nowbody questions (an many reapeat) the idea that wealth and IQ are correlated. In fact, surveying the Internet one can quickly find that this idea is widely considered wrong. However, the fact that it is accepted acritically here shows a lot about how the American-dream ideology and this false sense of meritocracy is so deep inside the contemporary tech culture.

How Fragile Is Our Intellect?

Related Stories