In what ways is Shenk arguing that ideological evolution parallels evolution in nature, but at a much faster pace? Is it possible for great thinkers to come out of time periods where little competition is present? If so, what might be the biology and motivation behind this?
Earlier on, Shenk mentioned the Flynn effect in which IQ tests as a whole have illustrated a rapid increase in intelligence over time. Is this increase in intelligence purely a cultural phenomenon of increased competition? If so, will it ever cap off or is our capacity for intelligence unlimited? In what ways could the Flynn effect and increased competition also be explained by genetics and biology?
(Jacob Yomtoob
jakeyomtoob@gmail.com)
jakeyomtoob@gmail.com)
It is difficult to determine the amount of competition present in a given time period because there is no way to measure competition as a whole. I’ll choose to define competition in a time period as how many other “great minds” came out of the same era or new technological advances occurred. Great thinkers of an era are not always considered great at the time in which they live. It is hard to choose a specific example of a great thinker because they’re work may not be recognized until much further into the future.
ReplyDeleteBoth Emily Dickinson’s and Franz Kafka’s works were not recognized or even released until after their deaths, meaning that neither of them truly wanted their work to be seen by all. This eliminates the idea that people are driven by the competition around them because Dickinson and Kafka may have just been motivated to write for the sake of writing and expressing themselves. On the other hand, competition may be necessary to expose great minds and innovations to the world for the sake of survival. Albert Einstein and his team would not have created the atomic bomb and brought the world into the era of nuclear weapons if it were not for the natural instinct to survive in a war. It may be a more modern form of animalistic natural selection, but in a way it still functions as a mechanism of “survival of the fittest”.
James Flynn supported the idea the “Children develop only as the environment demands development” (Shenk 35). Therefore, it can be argued that competition does breed a rapid increase in intelligence from generation to generation because people have to be able to keep up as everyone else’s intelligence increases. Again, it a modern example of survival of the fittest because those with the highest IQ’s should be leading the most successful lives. But increases in technology go along with this increase in IQ known as the Flynn Effect. Children and people in general are more exposed to new technology than they’ve ever been presently. Information is available to almost anyone in a modernized country. People’s general knowledge of everything surrounding them should be going up with all the access to technology and information. Children can absorb information very quickly as seen with how well a child learns language at such a young age. Following this idea, children should be able to pick up on technology just as quickly, and at a very young age be able to take advantage of it, therefore leading to more information in their minds.
I think that our capacity for intelligence is unlimited as long as technology continues to better and grow. Competition and technology go hand in hand because as competition
increases, so does the desire of people to invent or innovate which pushes technology forward.
Richard Yeker
ryeker@comcast.net
Ideological evolution parallels natural selection because over time the best of the best are singled out. However, natural selection works because bad genes are taken out of the gene pool while good genes are passed down. However, in our society, intelligence really doesn't have much to do with having children. In fact, many impoverished countries have high birth rates and poor education and literacy rates, suggesting that the opposite might be true for intelligence.
ReplyDeleteHowever, people are getting smarter as a whole, because information can be passed down and stays forever, unlike genes, which are sometimes taken out. Thus, our intelligence grows because of the work of past scientists whose theories we now know as truth. Because information does not go away and can be used by future generations, it accumulates and grows so that people become smarter.
Another thing that culture does to foster learning is that it places emphasis on things like science and math. By doing this, it encourages people to respect learning and to pursue it. This has a big impact, especially on children, since they are the ones that will go on and continue learning. The reason why culture is important is that it shapes people to become learners and researchers. Competition also plays a role in learning, since people are driven by motives like beating other people. This can lead to discoveries at a much faster pace. However, even without competition, there can still be people motivated enough to become excellent learners.
David Wang dwang95@gmail.com