People ARE getting dumber (14 I.Q. points dumber)

[maturin]

No evidence? Look at what passes as entertainment. Shows, movies, games, all are moving toward the worthless bang bang twenty minute long action sequence/setpiece. I've haven't done any hard research, but come on, if you enjoy any of these mediums, you must've noticed the glut of crap that has been elevated into the mainstream. People used to lineup for hours to go see Doctor Zhivago or Gone with the Wind

And for the 99.99% of human history when no one could read, and the ONLY entertainment was 'physical comedy' from killing animals and some limited form of dance and oral tradition accompanied by crude musical instruments incapable of playing anything cerebral?

This is line of reasoning requires that the middle class of Western Europe experienced an explosion of IQ growth on account of the printing industry.

 

[Carpenter]

No evidence? Look at what passes as entertainment. Shows, movies, games, all are moving toward the worthless bang bang twenty minute long action sequence/setpiece. I've haven't done any hard research, but come on, if you enjoy any of these mediums, you must've noticed the glut of crap that has been elevated into the mainstream. People used to lineup for hours to go see Doctor Zhivago or Gone with the Wind

And for the 99.99% of human history when no one could read, and the ONLY entertainment was 'physical comedy' from killing animals and some limited form of dance and oral tradition accompanied by crude musical instruments incapable of playing anything cerebral?

This is line of reasoning requires that the middle class of Western Europe experienced an explosion of IQ growth on account of the printing industry.

Exactly, now take that "IQ" growth (intelligence isn't the same as "IQ" but lets pretend it is for some reason) from the printing press and look at the forms of communication and education we have now.

A kid with a phone can drop out of school (which if your going to public school is actually a good idea) and if they have the desire to learn, they have a majority of humanities knowledge available to them in their hand. That kid will probably learn a lot faster considering they are researching something they are interested in knowing.

School kills the desire to learn for a lot of people but people that do have that desire (which most do in at least a useless field, like wanting to learn about the history of Hawkeye) can gain momentum pretty quickly because learning about one thing will always lead to needing to know another thing. In public school you are taught to slow down, stop, redo and redo and redo what you learned until it stops making sense and you can only start learning more stuff when the rest of the class or the teacher is ready for it.
Mass communication makes self education the norm. That's a far newer phenomenon than the TC seems to realize.

 

[Malty Milk Whistle]

No evidence? Look at what passes as entertainment. Shows, movies, games, all are moving toward the worthless bang bang twenty minute long action sequence/setpiece. I've haven't done any hard research, but come on, if you enjoy any of these mediums, you must've noticed the glut of crap that has been elevated into the mainstream. People used to lineup for hours to go see Doctor Zhivago or Gone with the Wind

And for the 99.99% of human history when no one could read, and the ONLY entertainment was 'physical comedy' from killing animals and some limited form of dance and oral tradition accompanied by crude musical instruments incapable of playing anything cerebral?

This is line of reasoning requires that the middle class of Western Europe experienced an explosion of IQ growth on account of the printing industry.

Good point, and I would argue that we're undergoing another, due to the widespread use of the internet and all the connections that come with it.
Even on Youtube, there's channels which are purely dedicated to knowledge and Booklernin'. It's a wonderful thing.

Also, Victorian Intellectuals may have been more intelligent than a widely scattered group of people from today from a huge spread of social and economical variables?
Say it ain't so!

 

[AngloDoom]

It's true: with the increasing accessibility of information and higher education people have become less intelligence - in the same way the longer you stay in a sauna, the colder the swimming pool is when you get in.

 

[ShipofFools]

I don't think people are getting dumber.
I do think that these bullshit idols and heroes the media tries to shovel down our and our kids's throats are a lot dumber then they used to be.

This mass media thing... I don't think it's healthy. I think people need to stop worrying about Myley Cyrus or Justin Bieber or fuckers like them, stop thinking about empty-headed, non creative celebrities and focus on what is going on in your own life.
There are plenty of people in our own lives that deserve our attention, don't waste it on these icons the media has created.

You know, young kids see the celebrity lifestyle and think it's great, and what's worse they think they should live like that too, not knowing you can be so much happier if you focus on people instead of bullshit thinks like lifestyle, style, brands and all that shit.
That fucking shit never made anybody happy. Now when you buy a car or a jacket or something way more expensive then it's worth, and you get that warm feeling inside of you?
Yeah that is not happiness, it's only temporary and goes away real quick, and then your life is shit again because you put idols and things in front of the people who really matter.

...

I got off topic for a while there.
So in summary: I don't think people are getting dumber, but I do think whatever the fuck passes for culture that these media conglomerates are shoving up our asses is getting really fucking stupid.

 

[Carpenter]

No evidence? Look at what passes as entertainment. Shows, movies, games, all are moving toward the worthless bang bang twenty minute long action sequence/setpiece. I've haven't done any hard research, but come on, if you enjoy any of these mediums, you must've noticed the glut of crap that has been elevated into the mainstream. People used to lineup for hours to go see Doctor Zhivago or Gone with the Wind

And for the 99.99% of human history when no one could read, and the ONLY entertainment was 'physical comedy' from killing animals and some limited form of dance and oral tradition accompanied by crude musical instruments incapable of playing anything cerebral?

This is line of reasoning requires that the middle class of Western Europe experienced an explosion of IQ growth on account of the printing industry.

Good point, and I would argue that we're undergoing another, due to the widespread use of the internet and all the connections that come with it.
Even on Youtube, there's channels which are purely dedicated to knowledge and Booklernin'. It's a wonderful thing.

Also, Victorian Intellectuals may have been more intelligent than a widely scattered group of people from today from a huge spread of social and economical variables?
Say it ain't so!

What? Where did you get that? Victorian "Intellectuals" were not anywhere near as intelligent as the average person (let alone an average group) and it's kind of funny that you state that as some interesting new fact when that claim cannot possibly be backed up by any evidence. It's like saying the average German things about cupcakes every ten seconds.

The idea that Victorian "intellectuals" were so wise, even by today's standards, only exists because of the self serving BS spread by said "intellectuals" at the time and of course a steady stream of "modernized history" movies that present themselves as documentary or docudrama while presenting a romanticized version of history as fact.

 

[Carpenter]

I don't think people are getting dumber.
I do think that these bullshit idols and heroes the media tries to shovel down our and our kids's throats are a lot dumber then they used to be.

This mass media thing... I don't think it's healthy. I think people need to stop worrying about Myley Cyrus or Justin Bieber or fuckers like them, stop thinking about empty-headed, non creative celebrities and focus on what is going on in your own life.
There are plenty of people in our own lives that deserve our attention, don't waste it on these icons the media has created.

You know, young kids see the celebrity lifestyle and think it's great, and what's worse they think they should live like that too, not knowing you can be so much happier if you focus on people instead of bullshit thinks like lifestyle, style, brands and all that shit.
That fucking shit never made anybody happy. Now when you buy a car or a jacket or something way more expensive then it's worth, and you get that warm feeling inside of you?
Yeah that is not happiness, it's only temporary and goes away real quick, and then your life is shit again because you put idols and things in front of the people who really matter.

...

I got off topic for a while there.
So in summary: I don't think people are getting dumber, but I do think whatever the fuck passes for culture that these media conglomerates are shoving up our asses is getting really fucking stupid.

Focusing on people is how those horrible horrible child stars got started in the first place. Myley Cyrus or Justin Beiber didn't become "pop idols" because of brands or products, they are just used to sell said products. It's not the "pop stars" that obsess over the products, it's the consumers. We are bombarded with subliminal advertising and social engineering every day we browse the internet, listen to the radio, or watch tv. It's usually meant to have a stronger effect on children because then they grow up as consumers and make more little consumers.

And maybe that's fine, maybe that's the intended path for human evolution, but if our society angers you so much, maybe reserve some of that hatred you put on kid stars for the corporations and organizations that turn these kids out in the first place.

Look I hate pop music too but do you honesty think Justin Beiber is horrible as a human being? He started singing because he enjoyed it, because he wanted to entertain people and create something. He wanted to develop a talent. Under different circumstances he could have become a rock icon or got involved in some new, fringe genre of music. He wasn't born a spoiled prick, he was turned into one or at least has to play one.

The people that really run this country (those that hold the coin and more importantly the debt) want our "pop stars" and "idols" to be self entitled, spoiled, snotty jerks because that's the perfect consumer. They want everything they can't afford (credit cards provide debt, debt is worth more than the same amount in cash) and they are so full of themselves that they drive other people crazy, get enough of those people and the "stragglers" become anti-social as a natural defense to the insanity around them, and the anti-social person is the other type of consumer, the kind that tries to fill the holes in his life with products. The person is depressed because they are unable to connect to anyone else but rarely would a person be self aware enough to realize this so they get it in their head that they just need that new pill or the new pillow set or the new video game.

My point is the idols themselves are not really dumb, in fact many get into it pretty smart and promising but are conditioned through social pressure and drugs into another "burn out" because it makes for great media coverage while setting it up to make more room for the next idol.

I know that sounds crazy, maybe even bordering on "conspiracy theory" but just look at how we act, just look at yourself bringing up how much you hate Cyrus and Bieber. Why those names? How do you know who they are if you don't listen to the music? It's because there are cycles of "interest" that the media constantly beats into our brains to the point where even people that want no part in it still have the names, songs, and images seared into their mind through repetition.


Or maybe I'm wrong and it's all just silly stuff with no meaning and nobody is trying to be in charge of anything ever.

EDIT: The stuff the "corporate media is jamming down our throats" may be unpleasant but it's far from stupid. "Buy my product!" is a stupid ad, we don't see that with large corporations. They use years of research into the human mind and human behavior to develop advertisements so subversive that you can consciously think "Man that makes me never want to buy that thing" except that now you are completely unable to get it out of your head and you feel compelled to tell your friends or family how stupid you think that new commercial for that product is.

See what happened there? These companies can hire the people to put together enjoyable ads but they want the messages and images to be associated with strong emotion because that's when people spend the most. Easiest strong reactions to get out of people? Anger and disgust. Suddenly the obviously "stupid" commercials and the gross out skittles commercials start to make a hell of a lot of sense.


Sorry that was a long rant but hopefully somebody will read it.

 

[Carpenter]

It's true: with the increasing accessibility of information and higher education people have become less intelligence - in the same way the longer you stay in a sauna, the colder the swimming pool is when you get in.

Right, that makes sense, more information makes people less intelligent.

No your analogy pretty much spells it out for you, people only SEEM less intelligent just like the water only seems colder, it's still the same temperature as it was before you got into the sauna.

Higher education? How do you measure how "high" education is? Can you actually provide some evidence that mainstream education is "higher" than it has been?
Should we be worried that our system for educating the youth might be some kind of addict?

 

[ShipofFools]

Sorry that was a long rant but hopefully somebody will read it.

Well I did, and I have to say: maybe I didn't word it as well as you did, but that was exactly what I meant to say.
I don't hate those pop idols or anything, I hate it that people find them so important. And I did blame corporate cocksuckers for this empty, soulless culture they have created:

So in summary: I don't think people are getting dumber, but I do think whatever the fuck passes for culture that these media conglomerates are shoving up our asses is getting really fucking stupid.

So yeah. But you did word it much better then I did

 

[Pebkio]

Yeah, I.Q. tests have always been a bit iffy in the same way that the universe is a bit big. I trust those tests that base everything on someone's short-term memory in relation to abstraction more than your standard "if blah is bleh and bippity is boppity, then how much money will you pay me to tell me you're clever?"

 

[Carpenter]

Sorry that was a long rant but hopefully somebody will read it.

Well I did, and I have to say: maybe I didn't word it as well as you did, but that was exactly what I meant to say.
I don't hate those pop idols or anything, I hate it that people find them so important. And I did blame corporate cocksuckers for this empty, soulless culture they have created:

Thanks for actually reading it, I have a habit of being ranty and "unfocussed" (or so they tell me) making it hard for people to understand what I am getting across.

Yeah it is pretty sickening at first but there is hope, think about what this means. People in power manipulating the masses and trying to dumb the populace down is not new, know what is new? The efficiency in which we are able to spread this information and uncover more information and expose more strange abuses of power and position.

Call it intelligence, moral strength, or just plain luck, it's clear that as we progress we are starting to notice that evolution isn't just a long cycle process but can also be seen in the span of a few generations. I think part of that evolution is going to be us very soon realizing that we can rule ourselves and that we would be better off without the immortal and inhuman corporations having more rights than a human being.

 

[Carpenter]

Yeah, I.Q. tests have always been a bit iffy in the same way that the universe is a bit big. I trust those tests that base everything on someone's short-term memory in relation to abstraction more than your standard "if blah is bleh and bippity is boppity, then how much money will you pay me to tell me you're clever?"

I have taken an IQ test, it's nothing like what you described.

The one I took spent far more time testing my problem solving ability with strange puzzles.

Maybe do some quick research before just assuming that something is pointless hogwash.

 

[ShipofFools]

Sorry that was a long rant but hopefully somebody will read it.

Well I did, and I have to say: maybe I didn't word it as well as you did, but that was exactly what I meant to say.
I don't hate those pop idols or anything, I hate it that people find them so important. And I did blame corporate cocksuckers for this empty, soulless culture they have created:

Thanks for actually reading it, I have a habit of being ranty and "unfocussed" (or so they tell me) making it hard for people to understand what I am getting across.

Yeah it is pretty sickening at first but there is hope, think about what this means. People in power manipulating the masses and trying to dumb the populace down is not new, know what is new? The efficiency in which we are able to spread this information and uncover more information and expose more strange abuses of power and position.

Call it intelligence, moral strength, or just plain luck, it's clear that as we progress we are starting to notice that evolution isn't just a long cycle process but can also be seen in the span of a few generations. I think part of that evolution is going to be us very soon realizing that we can rule ourselves and that we would be better off without the immortal and inhuman corporations having more rights than a human being.

Yeah I agree. Personally I believe the internet's impact will be a lot bigger then we thought. The big changes to society are obvious, but there are subtle changes too, and I think those subtle changes will end up having the biggest impact of all.

 

[Pebkio]

Yeah, I.Q. tests have always been a bit iffy in the same way that the universe is a bit big. I trust those tests that base everything on someone's short-term memory in relation to abstraction more than your standard "if blah is bleh and bippity is boppity, then how much money will you pay me to tell me you're clever?"

I have taken an IQ test, it's nothing like what you described.

The one I took spent far more time testing my problem solving ability with strange puzzles.

Maybe do some quick research before just assuming that something is pointless hogwash.

Oh, and thanks for bringing up another issue. It's not like these different I.Q. tests are standardized. How do you standardize a test to measure all the possible ways that someone can be intelligent anyway? This guy... person... Carpenter took one test that was different to tests I've taken which have been different from each other. And yet they all try to give you a number on the same numbering scale, so what does that tell you about the measurement?

Let me guess, Guypersoncarpenter, you got a nice score so now you're compelled to defend the test because you'll feel like you're defending your score. Well don't, it's a silly thing to do, honestly.

 

[deleted139124]

DELETED

 

[bug_of_war]

If it's in the dictionary as a comparative adjective that's good enough for me. I'm curious as to what crazy stringent standard you have for words to be words.

Well, I learnt it at school, in year 5, when I wrote dumber and my teacher corrected me, that's where my "crazy stringent standard" came from. I'm going to assume you're using the internet dictionary or an American one, the former I would doubt, the latter I'd be more inclined to accept seeing as how American spelling is often different to British/Australian/New Zealand spelling.

 

[CriticalMiss]

IQ tests are mostly bollocks. A few years ago I decided to find out what my IQ was and did a few tests, including a MENSA one if I remember correctly. The results went from the 110s to the 130s. Which doesn't sound very promising as a way to measure intelligence. Also George W Bush apparently has an IQ in the same range (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Presidential_IQ_hoax), and we all know how startlingly intelligent he is.

Having a high or above average IQ doesn't really make you more intelligent, it just means you were better at doing the things in that IQ test than the majority of the population.

 

[Ledan]

My two-cents on the issue:
The lower classes have always been the ones to produce more children. Through medieveal times to now. If that would have had an impact on human intelligence, we would not have gotten to where we are today. People are getting smarter as we more people now than 100 years ago get education.
The OP only seems to regard the upper classes 100 years ago as real people. They were a minority. And if you want to take a look at the 'real' entertainment back then look into penny dreadfulls that were heavily criticized at the time.

 

[K12]

There is a very well known effect in intelligence testing called the Flynn effect which is the observation that avergae IQ scores increase by approximately 3 points per generation (or possibly per decade I forget the exact numbers)

This means that IQ are adjusted to be harder over time so that the tests are compare to an up to date average. If this study is accurate then it has another significant

The tests don't measure a modern understanding of intelligence, they simply measure reaction times which at best is an estimation of some types of fluid intelligence. Perhaps this could have declined while general intelligence increases as the kind of intellectual skills has changed in the modern world. The ability to calculate large numbers quickly is not very useful since the invention of the calculator.

This assumes you believe that there is a general intelligence g which can be accurately represented by a number.

I'm not reading the whole study because I'm not paying for it but I would strongly hope that they corrected for things like the children's background. If they simply tested in schools then the results would be largely meaningless as the average 14 child still in school in the Victorian era wouldn't be an accurate average of the population.

It would be similar to comparing university student intelligence in the 30s with the intelligence of university students now. You would expect a decline, not from a decline in average intelligence, but because university students represent a much larger and wider percentage of the population. Schooling has become less exclusive and far less a reserve for the mega geniuses.

Another final point, the study is "in press" so it hasn't received the full peer review treatment yet only the first few stages required to be published.

 

[Malty Milk Whistle]

U wot m8

What?
What i'm saying is that a bunch of people who were VERY rich (because only they could afford to take the tests.) also happened to possibly maybe be more well read and knowledgeable than some farmer in a shack in Nigeria, who probably never had more than 4 years of schooling.
I'm not saying that victorian upper class were wise, which is a kinda strawman.
There's a rather large difference between 'wisdom', 'intelligence' and 'knowledge' which I can't go into, as i'm nowhere near qualified/educated on the subject. Also, among the gentry of Victorian England, it was considered quite fancy and admirable to be well read on a wide variety of subjects(also saying that they weren't inteligent is a bit of a kick in the teeth to common sense)
But i'm getting off track, what I'm trying to say is that there's no possible way to accurately compare the I.Q tests of today, with them in the 19th century.
Overall, I really don't think people are getting dumber, more people are just wanting to feel better about themselves by slating pop culture.