Has the average person become stupider in last 5000 years?

I meant to add in my last post, that "stupider" is indeed a proper word.

MyOwnDrum said:

Interesting article here on recent human evolution. Apparently brain size in humans has shrunk in the last 5000 years. A possible reason is given in the article I will link to:

Humans Still Evolving as Our Brains Shrink - Evolution | Human | Theory | Man | Paleontology - FOXNews.com

In other words, the need to be intelligent isn't as much of a biological imperative as society becomes more complex. Stupid people are able to survive and reproduce. The phenomenon that we see today, with the less intelligent underclass reproducing itself at a higher rate, has been present for some time.

Please vote on your opinion of this theory.

Click to expand...

When a species has come to a point where it does not have to make decisions because there are too many laws.......then yes the intellect will be bound to fail.

MyOwnDrum said:

Please vote on your opinion of this theory.

Click to expand...

I disagree with that theory. I would have to say the average person is either more intelligent or the same. I would have to say the same, its that what the average person knows today knows about mathematics instead of farming techniques,or that the average person today knows about how to work electronic devices while the average person back then knew about specific tasks like tracking ,metal working and other things relevant back then.

Just because people are behaving badly and out for nothing but themselves does not mean the human race is getting dumber. It is quite the opposite.

Because of how quickly we have access to information and better education we are much smarter now than ever before.

If this is a good or bad thing remains to be seen.

MyOwnDrum said:

Please vote on your opinion of this theory.

Click to expand...

Fox is as bad about science as it is about politics.

Surprisingly, based on skull measurements

Click to expand...

Clearly the author of the story doesn't seem to realize that everything inside your skull is not brain matter.

Neanderthals had more cubic centimeters, but much of that was insulation. By the reasoning of more space = more brain = smarter, they were smarter.

I would actually argue that the average person in modern, western contexts is actually dumber than the average aborigine. They are less than equal in basic problem solving (using tools to an end), less physically capable, and are placed into societies with ideological constructs they choose to side with and cannot see out of.

Intelligence, is rather subjective, however. We could be addressing booksmarts, in which the subjects seem more intelligent after acquiring higher knowledge, or we could be addressing the smarts on standardized army entrance testing. Cause if you get less than ace on those, you're a dumb dumb.

I teach tae kwon do and I've done TKD in a third world country. The western students arent as coordinated, sharp, quick to learn or capable of following directions or controlling themselves like the third world students are.

(Though the question is whether people have gotten smarter over the past few thousand years)

The answer would be no. The potential for intelligence is the same. Dolphins have larger brains than us, yet they cannot read.


Elaborate on this underclass you speak of.

we are probably getting smarter and stupider at the same time.

the type of intelligence used to navigate in a forest is not the same as what is used to write a poem or software.

we are probably losing intelligence in areas such as visual and audio processing ( being able to see/hear other animals from distance ) while at the same gaining in areas such as language processing, abstract thought or even emotional intelligence.

of course on the whole surviving today takes much less effort ( both physical and mental ) which is why both our muscles and our brains are getting smaller.

and pretty soon life will be so easy that you won't need anything at all. it won't matter if you have arms or legs or a brain. they will just plop you on life support from the day you're born and you'll watch your MSNBC or FOX for your 115 years then die.

It certainly explains the Messiah's victory.

SE102 said:

I would actually argue that the average person in modern, western contexts is actually dumber than the average aborigine. They are less than equal in basic problem solving (using tools to an end), less physically capable, and are placed into societies with ideological constructs they choose to side with and cannot see out of.

Click to expand...

Hand the average aborigne a calculator and see if he can figure out how to balance a check book. Hand him the jack and lug wrench and see how long it takes him to change the tire on the jeep. And lets not pretend your average aborigine isn't loaded to the gills with ideology aka religious superstitions.

Take your average city dweller, give him a stick and tell him to dig for kasava roots, and he'll have at least a general idea of what to do. Give him some vines and tell him he needs to make a fishing net, and he'll figure it out.

Don't confuse the aborigine's culturally transmitted behaviors and knowledge with his native intelligence, which is, on the average, no different than the city boy's.

Has the average person become stupider in last 5000 years?

Click to expand...

Nah the average person is still not too smart but not too dumb, just kinda middle of the road. :2razz:

Orius said:

The male homosexual brain differs in several ways, the main one being that the corpus collosum (the conduit which connects the two halves of the brain) is less massive. Homosexual men, on average, tend to be better at languages and verbal articulation, as well as spatial thinkers. There hasn't been enough study into potential evolutionary reasons for homosexuality, but I think gay men are meant to serve a special role in society that is hard to observe because of our modern social order. Maybe in tribal society it would be more clear.

Also, to the general aspect of the OP, food sources for humanity in the world have increased in the whole since the advent of agriculture, and, in the past 50 years, the Green Revolution. People are getting taller and our brains are receiving more nourishment. It'll be interesting to see how this affects our brain output. Not to mention the internet and access to a wide array of information and stimulus which we are processing in ever larger quantities!

Click to expand...

People have actually been getting shorter since the agricultural revolution (except for a slight up-tick post-Industrial Revolution). The trend appears to be continuing, at least for the specific area mentioned in the article

Human Evolution: Are Humans Still Evolving?



As far as intellectual capability I'm not quite sure. I don't see any evidence that we are getting smarter, only that we are gaining more knowledge. In a recent philosophy class I took, we had to read passages from some older philosophers. It was damn hard to understand them and not just due to changes in writing style. I'm not sure however, if this is indicative of a decrease in intelligence or simply that people used to focus on the intellectual much more in the past.

Aunt Spiker said:

Yes, but is that intelligence?

I think creativity and intelligence are unrelated

Click to expand...

Creativity happens as a result of intelligence. Just look at the greatest minds of the last century. All highly creative individuals.

Aunt Spiker said:

Yes, but is that intelligence?

I think creativity and intelligence are unrelated - though it is an interesting study. (I tried to find the article that I read about this in but can't quite land my hands on the exact one - it wasn't biased, it was in a science-journal of sorts....anyway)

Click to expand...

i can't agree with that. the most creative people i know are highly intelligent. of course, that's anecdotal only.

Hatuey said:

Creativity happens as a result of intelligence. Just look at the greatest minds of the last century. All highly creative individuals.

Click to expand...

(several people quoted me so I just picked you out of the hat to continue the questioning...)

It depends....

Someone can be highly creative - but still be quite ignorant, unable to comprehend subjects and think logicaly or even to communicate for a variety of reasons.

Others can be quite logic, overall considered smart, able to comprehend what they're taught and so forth - yet still be very uncreative.

I think it dpeneds on how we're defining "intelligence" and "creativity"

Intelligence:

1.capacity for learning, reasoning, understanding, and similar forms of mental activity; aptitude in grasping truths, relationships, facts, meanings, etc.

2.manifestation of a high mental capacity: He writes with intelligence and wit.

3.the faculty of understanding.

4.knowledge of an event, circumstance, etc., received or imparted; news; information.

Creativity:

1.the state or quality of being creative.

2.the ability to transcend traditional ideas, rules, patterns, relationships, or the like, and to create meaningful new ideas, forms, methods, interpretations, etc.; originality, progressiveness, or imagination: the need for creativity in modern industry; creativity in the performing arts.

3.the process by which one utilizes creative ability: Extensive reading stimulated his creativity



So - I stand by my belief:

Intelligence can exist without what we define as "creativity."
And creativity can exist without what we consider to be "intelligence."

Part of the reason why I consider there to be a strong separation and difference between the two is that my two older children are both autistic and their differences are quite noticable (between eachother and between themselves and 'regular' children) One is very creative, the other is not. one is highly intelligent in certain areas, the other is not. . . so on, so forth. Their lack of ___ or presense of ____ shows, every day, that one can exist without the other in a human being - and that human being can function quite well without it.

MyOwnDrum said:

Interesting article here on recent human evolution. Apparently brain size in humans has shrunk in the last 5000 years. A possible reason is given in the article I will link to:

Humans Still Evolving as Our Brains Shrink - Evolution | Human | Theory | Man | Paleontology - FOXNews.com

In other words, the need to be intelligent isn't as much of a biological imperative as society becomes more complex. Stupid people are able to survive and reproduce. The phenomenon that we see today, with the less intelligent underclass reproducing itself at a higher rate, has been present for some time.

Please vote on your opinion of this theory.

Click to expand...

Very interesting. I do believe in intelligence devolution. Humans before needed to be a lot more able to do things, now we just get everything served. Also we are less able physically as we never use our bodies anymore, which I also think is in general decline. People seems to be on average pretty dumb, simple minded, and obsessed with fun and pleasures, as oppose to intelligence, abilities, skills and so fourth.

I believe its very possible that humans in generals are less and less intelligent by each generation. If the despise of intelligent ideas as oppose to fun ideas, in media, politics and such is not a clear proof of it, then other things is a clear proof.
On average humans are also less and less diverce and more specialiced, which makes many humans blind to intelligent opinions, that arent related to their speciality.

Also, back to the physical aspects.. Look at parkour/freerunning for example, which is getting popular again these days, but is most likely thousands of years old(proven Asian skill), and was much more frequent per 1000 pop. then than now.

I do believe in exceptions. I do believe the smartest people today are far smarter than the smartest people 500 or 1000 or 5000 years ago, but then again, that could be wrong. Jesus was very smart, many historical figures have been extremely smart.

disneydude said:

What I talking about is "Stupider"......

Normally I don't comment on people's grammar or spelling....but I wasn't sure if the title were meant to be ironic....rather than saying "Has the average person become more stupid in the last 500 years".....

Click to expand...

Wow, very interesting point... NOT.

Orius said:

Brain size does not indicate intelligence level. That's a pretty basic tennet of neuropsychology. Brain complexity and organization determines intelligence

Click to expand...

There is no proof of that. Human knowledge in neuroscience is ridiculously primitive. More brain mass could indicate more intelligence, and a proof of this could be animals brains, disproof could be large animals, like the whales, but then again, they need huge brains to operate their huge complex bodies.

Anyways. The neuroscience that says we only use 10% of the brain is wrong(probably). I believe we use most, just in a far more advanced way than we(human science) are able to comprehend and measure.

lizzie said:

I meant to add in my last post, that "stupider" is indeed a proper word.

Click to expand...

A problem with todays society which could be certain proof that we are dumber on average, is the lack of focus. When debating a hot political topic for example, many people get hung up in completely irrelevant things, often thing that are more "fun and pleasurable" than the real issue.

There is no correlation between brain size and intelligence within a species. A very broad comparison can be drawn between different species using the average ratio of brain/body mass for each. Whale brains are large, but not relative to their size. Brain complexity is another factor.

No. People have always and will be people. Well, unless evolution decides to take that step and make us superhuman. Essentially, always be skeptical that somehow your time is vastly different from earlier eras.

Scarecrow Akhbar said:

Hand the average aborigne a calculator and see if he can figure out how to balance a check book. Hand him the jack and lug wrench and see how long it takes him to change the tire on the jeep. And lets not pretend your average aborigine isn't loaded to the gills with ideology aka religious superstitions.

Take your average city dweller, give him a stick and tell him to dig for kasava roots, and he'll have at least a general idea of what to do. Give him some vines and tell him he needs to make a fishing net, and he'll figure it out.

Don't confuse the aborigine's culturally transmitted behaviors and knowledge with his native intelligence, which is, on the average, no different than the city boy's.

Click to expand...

Wow you can put down what it takes to survive in a untamed environment, put down the complexity of the skills they use to get by and build their homes etc. It would take him about 2 seconds to figure out the jeeps tires never having seen one before. He would be stronger than the average man, and his greater use of manual tools would mean he could faster learn and employ our tools once they were demonstrated to him. Try and teach a 'city' boy to collect honey with handmade ropes and a handful of burning grass to scare away the bees. Not gonna happen. Lets not pretend like your average fool isn't loaded with superstitions here in the west, we call them teabaggers.

My contention is that literature shows that if you were to teach an aborigine how to balance a checkbook he would catch on faster than the western boy. They are extremely bright people. Niel Diamond is one example of an anthropologist who has experience with this.

SE102 said:

Wow you can put down what it takes to survive in a untamed environment, put down the complexity of the skills they use to get by and build their homes etc. It would take him about 2 seconds to figure out the jeeps tires never having seen one before. He would be stronger than the average man, and his greater use of manual tools would mean he could faster learn and employ our tools once they were demonstrated to him. Try and teach a 'city' boy to collect honey with handmade ropes and a handful of burning grass to scare away the bees. Not gonna happen. Lets not pretend like your average fool isn't loaded with superstitions here in the west, we call them teabaggers.

Click to expand...

Great point. Huge thanks.

MyOwnDrum said:

It seems to me that the human being of the hunting gathering society would need to have more generalized intelligence and definitely more physical stamina than a human being in an agricultural society.

Click to expand...

A human being in an agricultural society would need to have more generalized intelligence and definately more physical stamina than a human being in a McDonald's society.

Caine said:

A human being in an agricultural society would need to have more generalized intelligence and definately more physical stamina than a human being in a McDonald's society.

Click to expand...

It really depends on the agricultural society and the type of grain they are harvesting. If the grain suits the land is hardy, requires little maintenance and is resistant to insects, weather, etc. it takes alot less work.

Guns Germs and Steel (the book) is replete (about half its contents) with grains and the effect of them on the societies that harvested them.

SE102 said:

It really depends on the agricultural society and the type of grain they are harvesting. If the grain suits the land is hardy, requires little maintenance and is resistant to insects, weather, etc. it takes alot less work.

Guns Germs and Steel (the book) is replete (about half its contents) with grains and the effect of them on the societies that harvested them.

Click to expand...

What intelligence and stamina does it take to get food at McDonalds?