Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id QAA15316 (8.6.9/5.3[ref email@example.com] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from firstname.lastname@example.org); Sat, 18 Aug 2001 16:37:42 +0100 From: Philip Jonkers <P.A.E.Jonkers@phys.rug.nl> X-Authentication-Warning: rugth1.phys.rug.nl: www-data set sender to jonkers@localhost using -f To: email@example.com Subject: Re: Gene-Meme Co-evolution in Reverse? Message-ID: <firstname.lastname@example.org> Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2001 15:34:56 +0200 (CEST) References: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D3101745FFA@inchna.stir.ac.uk> <3B7D5BAF.12845.7C575B@localhost> <3B7DABCC.14C60A8A@pacbell.net> In-Reply-To: <3B7DABCC.14C60A8A@pacbell.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.5 X-Originating-IP: 18.104.22.168 Sender: email@example.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org
Many thanks Bill for this wonderful feedback.
If I understand it correctly your posting suggests that intelligence shows a
specializing trend. Maybe our culture is growing to such an extent that
selecting only certain elements to learn becomes desirable and natural.
After all, how many kids are good in math and simultaneously get their
way around on the internet?
I'll dig deeper into the subject by consulting to your internet reference
(and others?). As Joe correctly mentioned, genetic evolution is a
very gradual process indeed. Consider the possibility that intelligence changes
might go unnoticed within several generations. You and I may not live to
see whether the gene-meme co-evolution actually is shifted in reverse or not.
Quoting Bill Spight <email@example.com>:
> Dear Joe,
> "The rising-IQ trend is often called the Flynn Effect after New
> Zealand sociologist James Flynn, who first noticed the phenomenon
> in the 1980s. Since 1984, Dr. Flynn has published a series of
> papers showing that IQs in at least 13 developed countries have
> gained five to 25 points in recent decades.
> He managed to find what others had missed because he did not look
> at average IQ scores, which rank how people compare with each
> other at a certain point.
> Instead, Dr. Flynn looked at the number of questions people
> answered correctly on the intelligence tests over the years and
> found everyone from school children to soldiers was scoring
> progressively better.Interestingly, Dr. Flynn does not
> necessarily believe the Flynn Effect points to a rise in
> "If people, children, were really becoming smarter, teachers
> would be saying, 'My gosh I can't believe how fast kids learn
> today,' and they are not saying that," he said in an interview
> this week.
> "If people were really getting as smart as the test scores
> suggest, we should be blinded by brilliance."He suggests that the
> rising-IQ trend tells us more about what society demands of
> people's mental abilities than about their actual intelligence
> level because the gains have been in very specific skills.
> So the data is misreported. IQ scores have not been rising. And thus
> whatever the term may mean, if anything, has not been rising. What has
> been increasing is specific knowledge, both declarative and
> So people today would have scored higher on previous IQ tests. The
> Effect illustrates the cultural relativity of IQ tests, reflecting
> cultural change over time.
> 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)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Aug 18 2001 - 16:43:38 BST