RE: Gene-Meme Co-evolution in Reverse?

From: joedees@bellsouth.net
Date: Sat Aug 18 2001 - 00:00:15 BST

  • Next message: Scott Chase: "RE: Logic"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id XAA13668 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Fri, 17 Aug 2001 23:57:25 +0100
    From: <joedees@bellsouth.net>
    To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 18:00:15 -0500
    Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
    Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
    Subject: RE: Gene-Meme Co-evolution in Reverse?
    Message-ID: <3B7D5BAF.12845.7C575B@localhost>
    In-reply-to: <998048139.3b7d018bf3ed3@rugth1.phys.rug.nl>
    References: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D3101745FFA@inchna.stir.ac.uk>
    X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c)
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    On 17 Aug 2001, at 13:35, Philip Jonkers wrote:

    > Hi Vincent,
    >
    > > Interesting stuff, Philip. A bit Wellsian for me though.
    >
    > I'm glad you like it.
    >
    > > Certainly, professional classes have fewer children. As has
    > > been mentioned before on the list, one idea is that the
    > > demands on ensuring that offspring are able to maintain the
    > > social status of their parents requires so many
    > > resources (e.g. putting kids through university say), that it
    > > precludes lots of children. Recent UK survey evidence suggests that
    > > children from 2 child families do best at school (particularly the
    > > second child), followed by only children, with children from
    > > families of 3 or more kids doing worst at school overall. so,
    > > resources isn't a simple measure (sibling interaction may foster
    > > better learning potential than the isolated experience of an only
    > > child in early development). Cultural success then does impact on
    > > genes.
    >
    > Thanks for this info. Having two kids turns out to be the magic
    > number then.
    >
    > > One spanner, in the works- I thought IQs were generally
    > > increasing not decreasing?
    >
    > I can't really tell, that's why I'm asking this group.
    >
    > Is there anyone out there who has the required authority
    > to answer this one?
    >
    > If IQs are still going up, it would be rather a deathblow to
    > my hypothesis. Well, the trend may yet have to
    > set in though.
    >
    They are rising on average; check out the Baldwin Effect.
    >
    > Philip.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > ===============================================================
    > This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
    > Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
    > For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
    > see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
    >

    ===============================================================
    This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
    Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
    For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
    see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Aug 18 2001 - 00:01:50 BST