The importance of increasing human general intelligence

What makes you think children get their intelligence from their mother?

Although I do think that you are off base when you say that intelligence is passed down by mothers, I would agree that those young men who join gangs and cause all the problems, that their mothers were of the type that hit and denigrated their sons. You've heard the type, "sit yer butt down 'for I slap ya upside yo head."

 

They are both true. Nutrition and hygiene have increased average intelligence, and those with interests in intellectual pursuits tend to leave rural areas for centers of intellectual and economic activities.

 

You want to know how to make people smarter? Get rid of the smart phones.

Why do I say this? Because if I wanted to know something, I had to go to the library and research it, meaning that it would stick in my memory, and I would remember it afterwards. Now? If you don't know something, simply look it up on your phone, find what you want, and use that, forgetting it shortly afterwards. And, the really scary thing is, just about anyone can put just about anything they want to on the 'net, even if it's patently false, so you have to be careful about your sources.

And, smart phones have made it easier for people to tune out others if they don't want to listen to them, simply fake having a text and walk away. It also makes it easier to join up with people who only believe like you do over social media. Sorry, but dissenting opinions and other viewpoints are what have taught me quite a bit. If you are always agreeing with me, then one of us, if not both of us, are wrong at some point in time, but we are reinforcing each other's bull crap.

 

Yep, there are thresholds in intellectual & social development. A child not exposed to oral language will have a tough time learning - because he/she didn't receive the prompts @ the right time. The same for fine motor skills, social skills, music, painting, writing - we're apparently prewired or hardwired to take in a lot of information & generalize from it. But without that triggering initial information, the neurological structures in the brain fail to grow - & if they fail to grow, it may be permanent.

It's like learning a foreign language as an adult - it's doable, but most people lose the facility to learn a second language early on. If they're never cultivated the skill, except for the first language, it's very hard to absorb all the needed information & learn to speak without an accent.

 

The intelligence increase derived from nutrition and hygiene probably has long since topped out, at least in the US. Rural life is not likely more hygienic or nutritious now than it was a generation ago.

 

You are letting your biases cloud your assessment of the situation. You see, the poor, who, practically by definition, are incapable of adequately providing for themselves, have two choices. They could wander around the countryside looking for work, food, and other resources. Yet they would unlikely find much. Or they could go to the city and live off the crumbs of the movers and shakers.

In the grand scheme of things, the poorest rarely vote. Looking at demographics, the most liberal areas in America tend to have a population that is well educated, not all that religious, mostly white and Asian, and well to do. Places like Silicon Valley are liberal because the type of people who work in the industries Silicon Valley is known for overwhelmingly tend to lean liberal.

 

I'm sure it has, for the general population. After all one doesn't see as many people walking around with childhood rickets caused bow leggedness as there used to be.

 

This is because mothers are most often the primary carer.

 

BINGO!

But I would add that no child is born an idiot (unless cognitively disabled, of course). What you call 'testing as an idiot' is actual idiocy. It has to be learned. Or in this case, not learned.

Once you understand how intellect works (look into synaptic pathways and their importance), it's very easy to see how/why children end up 'smart' or 'dumb'. In a nutshell, a primary carer must engage in frequent and regular focused eye contact with infants from birth. It's this eye contact which triggers the firming of synaptic pathways. Our lifelong intellect is almost entirely dependent upon this early development. Children put into long day care from a young age, often show symptoms of 'orphan syndrome'. Because there is no primary focused carer, they miss important synaptic development, and as a result will show signs of developmental delay and intellectual 'weakness'.

The same 'orphan syndrome' effect can happen within ordinary families .. even to an only child with a stay-at-home-mom. What happens in this case, is that the mom is disengaged intellectually and/or emotionally. Child is probably put in another room to sleep (instead of co-sleeping), so has far less contact with carer than is ideal. Child is probably not breastfed (breastfed children generally experience more focused eye contact from a primary carer .. for obvious reasons), and mom may be resisting her responsibility. She may provide the very best physical care and plenty of 'hugs', but be resistant to protracted and focused engagement. As in, wear child in a sling or front pouch for much of the day, and keep talking to him/her .. regardless of how young he/she is. It's time consuming, obviates self-indulgence of any kind, and is necessarily all down to her. Some women don't like that.

Once that's done (after about 12 months), it's just a matter of constant talking and eye contact engagement. We should be talking to our little kids around the clock, and focused on them directly for good parts of every day. Ask questions, show things, explain things, and ask more questions. Read, read, read, and read some more. Once they're close to school age, teach them to read and write simple sentences. School kids should be taken to libraries, taken to museums, taken to different landscapes, taken for walks in forests, over rocks by the sea etc, and all the while having everything they see explained. Tell them about world history, politics, the natural world, biology, art, music, the future, the stars, etc etc etc. Never stop teaching and telling. If you don't know these things yourself, make it your business to find out. That's not too much to ask for the sake of your kids, surely.

A child's developing mind must be fed constantly, from day one.

 

You dont have the foggiest notion how intelligent a farmer in the fly over states have to be. One of my HS best friends increased his farm holding from 500 acres to around 3000. Do you have any idea how intelligent you have to be to manage a 3000 acre farm operation???????????????

 

Intelligence can come from either the father or mother.

 

The birth defect can be mental degradation.

 

Well I can hardly dispute the logic. The problem is that TPTB dont want us more intelligent, they indeed seem to prefer that we be less intelligent. Our collective intelligence is being stunted on purpose by: chemicals in our environment (search 'fluoride iq harvard'), education designed to make us wage slaves as opposed to successful, televison 'programming', etc.

I believe research and developement of intelligence increasing technology for humans is already, and has been for a long time, being pursued in government and corporate contractor labs and programs for use by the breakaway civilization that increasingly views the rest of us as something between a resource to be controlled and a virus to be exterminated. They aren't going to share with us. We have to take the entire system back for The People before we can meaningfully advance any farther than we have.

 

Based upon my research I settled upon intelligence as being innate thus deterministic. I do however think that knowledge can be amassed over ones life thus one can be more informed than another with equivalent intelligence.

 

From looking into this, you're right. Or at least, the guys who know about this say it's a lot more difficult than simply saying it comes from a mother. I know I had read that it came from the mother, but it appears this was nothing more than a hypothesis.

 

Yes, they could wander around the countryside looking for work, but there's not much there for people of limited intelligence.

Do they vote? I'm not sure, but there are reasons why the rich vote democrat that have nothing to do with being intelligent. Silicon valley has a marked interest in keeping the borders open because so many of their employees are from other countries such as india and china. China, which has a very high IQ is a communist country! You can't get much more lefty than that. Russia which also has a fairly high IQ is in the same boat, and then we look at Europe, and they've been flirting with communism since the end of the first world war. Same goes for England, Australia, Canada, America...

It's something I've been trying to figure out, and I admit to not having a great handle on things. My idea that lefties are not the most intelligent monkeys in the barrel is not panning out on a macro level.

Then I look at the results of communism and have to wonder just how "intelligent" communists are. It might be democracy coupled with the mean, or it could be that free market capitalism is worse than communism, despite the body count of communists over the years.

It's an ongoing interest of mine, and I admit that I don't have all the answers.

Fair enough?

 

I was just making a fine point about the difference between birth defects and genetic defects. Birth defects can't be passed on. Genetic defects can be. They are two different things.

 

So you want to sterilize half of the population, by definition.

 

A mother smoking is not a lack of prenatal care. Please tell me how not having enough vitamins (prenatal care) causes genetic changes?

 

Smoking is not bad prenatal care?

 

There are multiple intelligences, and very few people excel in more than one.
IQ is a test rating, not an indication of anything other than scoring points on an arbitrary test based in linguistic and mathematical skills. There are many other skills that are just as important to our survival. One of the reasons we are a successful species is because we have different skills and intelligences.

What we need to figure out is not how smart someone is, but how they are smart. Einstein, Shakespeare, Michael Jordan, Plato, Bill Gates, Charles Darwin, and Frank Lloyd Wright were all smart, but in very different ways.

People thought Einstein was mentally challenged as a child and he didn't talk until he was 4, but he was a world renown genius. We need to be careful how we label people.

 

Prenatal smoking isn't care at all. It's borderline abuse.

 

If you did------------------------the democrat party would die out.

 

You will have a hard time convincing me that your statement is true. IMO the founding fathers for instance were brilliant men with a high IQ!!!!

 

I would add that being poor means a person doesnt have a high IQ. I know several people that came from a very poor circumstance, but had high IQs, and did well in life. OTOH I know several people that did well in school, and even college, and did not do well at all.

And worst of all I know people that have a high IQ, and have no common sense or everyday skills at all.

Then there are the fortunate people that have a high IQ, common sense and logic, and everyday skills that easily face what ever challenges life offers them.