Low intelligence and natural selection

Why has natural selection not eliminated low intelligence individuals? People that have dark skin (think African nations and places colonized by Europeans) have an average IQ less than Anglo Saxons. However, upon examination and analysis of the global population, there are over a billion people of this race. Why has natural selection not eliminated this race? Intelligence has been proven to influence all parts of life and is a large factor in the survival of an individual.

I suspect that this phenomenon exists because the requirements for survival are so basic that low intelligence is enough to survive. As global innovation continues, more low intelligence individuals will be able to survive as quality of life improves and the basic necessities for survival become ubiquitous.

 

this sentence dumbed down: black people are generally dumber than white people. that's what you're implying, no?

aka why aren't all black people dead

a race can't die off if they're not all equal in intelligence, emphasis on average, that's why they haven't died off. just like you said,

remind me how this is a debate thread if you answered your own question?

whats your point, is what I'm getting at

the debate topic is why aren't all dumb people dead, which really isn't one

 

Incorrect. You are over thinking the point. My message is clear. Let us not jump to conclusions. Do not make a generalization. The fact I presented is supported by direct evidence provided by Murray and Herrnstein in a controversial title, The Bell Curve.

You are again making a straw man out of my argument. Do not assume.

I did not answer my own question. I proposed a possible explanation, not a definitive cause.

This is a discussion thread and your generalizations about my case have added little to the debate.

 

Define intelligence

 

Most have enough intelligence to live, the only criterion other than luck needed for a trait to not be eliminated by natural selection.

A: Can you provide some evidence this is true?
B: This is racist. Skin color does not determine intelligence.
C: IQ is a terrible determinate of intelligence since it focuses on turning a broad idea into a number. IQ scores would be akin to ranking all media in the world instead of categorizing anything first. By restricting broad ideas to a singular rule set, the data gives favor to one category.
D: There may be a correlation that shows Africans having lower IQs, but that comes from the region lacking access to the necessary tools to provide as widespread good educational programs. Stupidity and lack of access to education are different especially when talking about traits since stupidity can be somewhat passed down but lack of education cannot be passed down as a trait.

The lack of intelligence you point out usually does not act as a large factor in the survival of an individual. If someone makes stupid decisions, it doesn't mean those stupid decisions push that individual towards death.

If your definition low intelligence is the same as lack of common sense than I agree to some degree. I think, though, that many problems with a common lack of common sense exist not because of natural selection but because people just don't try to learn from their experiences enough.

 

Natural selection isn't really at play in post-agricultural civilizations in the same way it exists in hunter-gatherer socieites. Simply put surviving requires a lot less physical strength as well as me talk fortitude.

--- Double Post Merged, Jun 29, 2018, Original Post Date: Jun 29, 2018 ---

While obviously IQ varies between groups, and IQ is at least partly linked to biology, the real debate centers more over the concept of "race". In your post you compare people in African countries too the "Anglo Saxon race" when any sociologist would tell you these distinctions are based on the political history of the world rather than science. You have yet to validatd the concept of race.

 

I would a argue that people from areas with less “intelligence /education” are better fitted to survive because they do not have all the crap people in “higher educated” areas need to live such as grocery stores and all that stuff I can guarantee that if the average “high iq” European was sent out into the wild they would not survive . so what I am saying is you’re whole post is not thought out and pretty garbage if you ask me

 

you don't need a real high iq to survive, find a mate, and reproduce.

 

I’m gonna focus on the natural selection bit, because the rest has yet to be proved.

As found in Darwin’s studied of the Galápagos Islands, geographical separation makes natural selection take different courses. On one island, a Finch may survive better with a hard beak for cracking shells, while on another, a long beak to reach into a flower to get nectar might make an individual more successful.

The same thing applies here.

Living in a first world country with a stable education system, surviving is different than individuals in a third world country - which are completely separate geographically.

I think you’re looking a little too widely at the idea of natural selection. If Joe Schmoe in the US is some genius architect, his success will not affect the survival of a poor African in Somalia (without extrenuous circumstances)

 

Dont you know that melanin blocks neuron growth. thats why i stay in my basement all day to prevent getting tan

 

To clarify:

Skin color does not determine intelligence. I did not say that. Correlation does not imply causation.

What people are commenting is similar to what I said in my original post. I agree with most of you.

 

Tear down this post! - Ronald regan to fuzzlr

 

I agree!