It's been a while since I posted something, and since then the group has achieved the remarkable milestone of 100+ members. Who knew so many of us didn't hate our own species? In celebration, I'm putting up a new post for everyone to add their two cents to, based on a very common subject of discussion for the self-aggrandizing and/or unaware:

Idiocracy.

[Disclaimer: None of the following is intended as an insult to anyone who holds the particular point of view I'm debunking. It's a very common misconception, and I myself believed it for the longest time. Hell, while current data does not support it... that could always change. Although, probably not.]

Anyone who's seen the movie is familiar with the concept. And anyone who's actually studied economics from the social development standpoint can tell you it's bollocks. Of course, Randall Monroe of XKCD does a far better job of elucidating my own stance:

Are people getting dumber?

In short, the answer is a resounding no. In spite of all the outstanding examples of stupidity one can point to (and, let's be honest, sites like Youtube and Facebook have made them far easier to witness than in previous years), the fact of the matter is that it's simply not true. In fact people in general are getting smarter, not dumber. The first link is a short piece of wonderful insight from one Steven Pinker, while the second is a simple explanation of the Flynn Effect.

This also goes back to my old Sheeple post (also featuring an XKCD comic, interestingly enough). People always spout these false assumptions with a distinct air of, "Of course you know that by the world, I mean everyone but me."

It is a distinct and inescapable assumption of misanthropy that humanity in general must be stupid. And, as an extension of that, getting stupider. At least, the actions of the human villains (and often the heroes) in all of these stories (you know which ones I mean) certainly leads me to believe the author made that assumption.

We, as humans, have plenty of things to be ashamed of. Being dumber than our forefather is (as of yet) NOT one of them. In fact, this argument follows a trend that I see all too often. This idea that the world is getting worse and worse, when the vast majority of the trends say otherwise, is both common and pervasive. Yes, there are some negative trends, such as climate change. But these problems are far from terminal, and so long as we continue to advance culturally, globally, and technologically, these problems will slowly start to disappear.

And we have a lot to be proud of, as well. We've come a hell of a long way from the cave-dwelling proto-humans that could barely rub two sticks together to start a fire. We continue to unlock the secrets of the universe at an accelerating rate, and we continue to use these secrets (for the most part) to better our lives on every level. Heck, just consider the washing machine.

One hundred years from now, our descendants will look back on us and say, "Man... could you ever imagine living like that? Poor bastards hadn't even figured out fusion power yet! And I'd probably go nuts if I knew I probably wasn't going to make it even halfway to 200. Yeesh."

The world is improving my friends. World-wide peace and prosperity isn't a pipe dream, it's an inevitability. So, don't lose hope, and keep working towards it... it's only a matter of time.

Agree? Disagree? Have something to add?

Post below and let the discussion begin!

I'd say that the whole idea of people becoming dumber is a misconception that people attribute to the equalization of relative intelligence in people. People's intelligence is equalizing yes, but that doesn't mean that people are being dumbed down. As you've said, overall intelligence is increasing to a new plateau and spreading out to the same level, sort of like the culture or racial equalization that we're seeing due to globalization.

To me it's nothing really new. I already learned of this back in my economics class. My professor even showed us that exact same XKCD comic to help explain the concept.

325913

Good! Yes, even basic level economics courses tend to disabuse people of these notions fairly quickly. More advanced courses only more so. I'm amused, though not very surprised, that your professor chose to use that comic.

As a side note, the links I posted are all still well worth checking out if you haven't seen some of them before. Particularly the washing machine one. Hans Rosling is the man.

325930
I did indeed read the links. Very interesting stuff here and there.

And yes; Hans Rosling is the man.

We're getting somewhere, and it's not dumber. We might be getting less active as our lives become more autonomous, but the thing that's really driving intellectual growth is wide internet access combined with the good 'ol public school system. I've learned almost everything I know today from those two sources, and I'm a smart one for my age. I may be tooting my own horn, but even then, if idiocracy was really occurring, I'd be dumb, you'd be dumb. We'd all be dumber than our parents! And are we? No! We actually are smarter!

The comic mentions moral decline. That doesn't really happen. Our parents were just like the teenagers of the current generation- my generation-, more or less, but without those newfangled cell phones, when they were teenagers. The thing is, people are paying more attention to it because it's become easy to ignore other things, and the continued increase in power and scope mass media has enjoyed has made it easy to look at the newest case of idiocy in youth without explaining that people of the previous generations did many of the same things that people use as examples of how kids have fewer or weaker moralities nowadays. I might be crazy, false, and fourteen years old, but this is how I see it.

This would be another case in which I noticed that people notice a single negative trait and then blow it way out of proportion, completely ignoring everything else for the sake of 'LOOKATMELOOKATME!'.

Like I recall this one time I saw a random vid on Youtube featuring a handful of morons failing spectaularly at answering some basic questions and naturally the comments were peppered with things like 'OH WE R SO DUM'.

Sure like...10 people out of...I dunno, 7 billion were morons, but unless you round up everything to 100%, that is kind of a minority.

326665
I don't know... certain moralities have become looser. But we've made so much progress in so many incredibly important issues that I'm more than willing to call the last 50 years a moral upgrade.

Again, Steven Pinker makes the argument much more eloquently than I ever could.

325902
I find it hilarious how 2 to 3 courses in economics can bring more enlightenment than an entire degree program for existential philosophy.

327416

There's something to be said for tangible data, an unbiased mind, and liberal applications of empirical analysis.

Nothing wrong with pondering, mind you. But I find that there's nothing quite like the scientific method for getting to the truth.

327427 indeed. The feeling is just so sweet when convoluted speculations and propped up assumptions are slaughtered by practical approaches and objectively measurable results.

326214

I completely agree. Moral decay is a figment of the misanthropic imagination. I can actually prove this with historical research. There is a term coined by Johann Gottfried Herder, a German Romanticist, best known in relation to Hegel's philosophy of history, a term called Zeitgeist, or "spirit of the times".

The general outlook of society and what it views as appropriate or inappropriate has shifted in progressive ways quite dramatically in the current century, and it can probably be linked with the ever burgeoning information technology advancement.

Here is a perfect example:

“I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in anyway the social and political equality of the white and black races – that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race. I say upon this occasion I do not perceive that because the white man is to have the superior position the negro should be denied everything.”

The above quote was given by Abraham Lincoln in the Fourth Debate with Stephen A. Douglas at Charleston, Illinois, September 18, 1858. Note that I'm not picking on Abe. Abraham Lincoln was quite progressive for his time, but that's the point. I understand that this is political speech, but it can be pointed out that this is an example of how the moral Zeitgeist has shifted over the years.

This is a speech, given by a presidential hopeful in full view of the public. What presidential hopeful could give such a speech today? It would be doing worse than committing political suicide, it might get them mobbed. What was morally acceptable in 1858 would be considered tantamount to hate speech now. The moral Zeitgeist has improved. A few other examples.

Genghis Khan is considered a conqueror and barbarian, BUT he was also quite fond of killing off the families of anyone who opposed him. Several times, entire cities were executed. This amounts to what would essentially be considered genocide, and no attempt was made to hide that such a thing was being done. The Mongols were, in fact, quite proud of it. Adolf Hitler is one of the most reviled men in history, his actions are viewed with complete contempt by pretty much anyone who can call themselves human. The systematic murder of eleven million people. However, I put it to you that he was no WORSE than Genghis Khan. However, Genghis was different in two important ways. One, he did not have access to modern technology, so arguably the scale of his crimes were less. Two, Genghis did not commit his crimes in a time period in which his actions were viewed as unacceptable.

No one LIKED genocide back then, but pretty much everyone was doing it, so it is not viewed with the same horror as Hitlers crimes. I can imagine some of the people reading this now are outraged that I would try to minimize what Hitler did. I'm not saying that what he did wasn't evil, I'm saying that what Genghis did was equally evil, but we don't view it with the same level of contempt and outraged horror that we do of someone from the modern era. Why? Because the moral Zeitgeist in the '40s had progressed, and we unconsciously recognize that Hitler should have KNOWN better.

My mother and I are a huge fans of the old black and white musical movies from the 40s and 50s. Often times we'll watch these movies together. Singin' In the Rain is probably my favorite. However, there is another movie called Holiday Inn that is interesting as it points out another example of the moral Zeitgeist moving on.

Holiday Inn is a movie about a group of performers who buy an Inn, then decide they are only going to open it for Holidays, but make it the sort of place that people HAVE to go to spend them. I mean full musical numbers for guests, fine dining etc. One of the Holidays they celebrate is Abraham Lincolns birthday, and you have to SEE this number to believe it. Bing Crosby and Fred Astaire in black face, and a large woman who bears a striking resemblance to the syrup mascot Aunt Jemima singing to her two children about how Abraham "freed the darkies like you and me". It's actually kind of embarrassing... the first time I saw it I actually laughed at how ridiculously racist it was, but it was viewed as completely NORMAL in the 1940s. TMC and AMC will no longer show this film BECAUSE of these segments. The moral Zeitgeist moves on.

Remember Looney Tunes? Ever notice that the really old ones from the 40s and 50s hardly ever get shown anymore? That's because they were riddled with scenes were minorities are poked fun of. I'm sure some of you remember such scenes from your childhood. A character would look into a pot and some explosive would go off, then they'd look up and they'd have big lips and black face from the char of the explosion. Or someone would have squinty eyes and a robe and wide brimmed ricehat and basically play the stereotype of an old Chinese worker or something.

Just everyday examples of the moral fabric of society getting stronger.

I leave you with one last extremely important example, folks. Probably the greatest sign of moral advancement you can find.

In the opening shots of World War II, during Germany's invasion of Poland, the German and Slovackian allies suffered over 59,000 casualties in the first days of the assault. This attack was viewed as a resounding success, in terms of its loss of life.

In the war in Iraq, US forces have sustained a total number for 4,487 killed. This war is viewed as a failure and as a horrendous loss of American lives.

The moral Zeitgeist no longer tolerates such horrific casualty numbers in war. Perhaps one day, friends, it will no longer tolerate war at all. One can certainly hope.

Indeed, one does.

330910

Brilliant.

330910

I would just like you to know the I physically clapped my hands and applauded at my computer screen upon finishing your post. This is the second time I have ever done this. The first was yesterday when I was linked to the washing machine presentation. Thank you.

330910 Society marches on. Very nice post.

Having read this post...

I just couldn't help it. To see the resounding proof that humanity is improving is always comforting and to see this much of it... yeah.

Invictus, Dusttraveller, You two have made my day. I wish that I could brofist you through my fucking computer. Thank you.

I feel like a better person just for having read this, and I'd like to toss my thoughts into the mix, if I may do so.

The concept of intellectual decay, while making it easier for people to differentiate themselves as if they're above the species they're a part of, is generally just that. A concept. A theory for people to generate false truths and mislead those who actually want to apply what we know to both what we've done in the past and what we can hope for in the future.

As for getting less intelligent, I'd have to disagree as well. If we take an outsider's perspective at the general intelligence of the Human race, then we're limiting ourselves based solely on data and the characteristics that aren't entirely what make us human.

We're complex beings, and the intelligence or lack there of isn't entirely reliant on the human species and its trends so much so that it is on the individual. That's what makes it so that we can't objectively look at intellectual decay without basically appearing inhuman. Taking this into consideration is all I ask.

Huh. That sounded more coherent than I thought it would. Not bad, me.