This is part of a series on intelligence and the decline of society. See this index.
One of my favorite articles ever was written by fellow blogger Free Northerner entitled “Abortion, Tomlinson, and Moral Midgets.” There he responded to the embryo trolley problem. It is well worth reading the latter and then reading Free Northerner’s primer on ethics.
Free Northerner concludes his piece by exposing the underlying major flaw: Utilitarianism.
All the above can be linked to one major moral flaw, the philosophical hobgoblin that eats the minds of morally stunted rationalists: Utilitarianism. Look past the fancy language and big words and utilitarianism is essentially stripping away man’s humanity and reducing him to units of pleasure and pain (perfect for our inhuman modern society), then doing cold calculations on how various actions allocate units of pleasure and pain, then deciding to take the action that gives the most overall pleasure.
The value of a human life cannot be described in terms of units of utility. We are not to be evaluated as you would figures in an accounting book. Doing so turns otherwise normal people into monsters who are willing to murder their unborn babies and kill their elderly or infirm.
Utilitarianism goes hand-in-hand with blankslatism. Utilitarians get very upset about IQ, rooted in unchangeable genetics. Since some groups—Hispanics and especially Blacks—have much lower average IQ than other groups—Asians and Whites—a genetic cause would mean they get lower utility that make them inherently inferior as persons. They think this. They assume you do too, and they’ll call you racist for merely acknowledging the fact of reality. But only they are racist. Here is why:
“It is a dangerous mistake to premise the moral equality of human beings on biological similarity because dissimilarity, once revealed, then becomes an argument for moral inequality.” — A.W.F. Edwards
Utilitarians conflate two things: biology and morality. And, really, what else can they do? Their entire system of morality is based on the physical: units of suffering, units of economic output, units of pleasure, etc. And so utilitarians place the premise of moral equality of human beings on biological similarity. They can only conceive that the world is a place where each person is capable of equal units of whatever they think is good and proper. Anyone using some other measure of morality—such as Christianity—must be lying.
When it turns out that biological dissimilarity is proven—which is obviously is with IQ—then this must mean that you believe in moral inequality. You must be the racist. But it is only they who believe this, because their utilitarianism forces this on them. They fall to their own argument and try to take you with them.
Do not let them. You are a Christian, and for you the moral value of a human life is not based on a requirement for biological similarity.
Good writeup. I agree genetics play a large part in outcomes, and every individual is valuable and unique.
A bit of a segue though.
Whenever I see a worldwide IQ chart I am reminded of our experience living in Asia. My spouse spent his youth (a fan of Taekwondo, big in the 80s) admiring what he believed to be Asian culture. I was excited too, and accompanied him though it was a remote assignment we lived off base and were completely emerged in the culture and economy. Knowing that this country in particular (South Korea) turned out the smartest math students in the world with the highest test scores…we expected something different from what we found.
What we saw made our jaws drop.
This wasn’t just culture shock, the vast majority of people were just not smart. And when I say not smart…literally parents would watch their small children shattering glass in an abandoned lot with their bare hands and clap like they had done something great instead of dangerous. We watched construction projects go up with no observable straight support beams. I could go on a long while about this.
I taught in the school system and the children were a joy, but they were forced to study about 12 hours per day (before going home to their homework assignments…there was school, then 3-4 hours of after school work in “institutes”). Their results were a matter of honor for the family, and cheating was expected. Even on the SAT and ACT exams, cheating was expected. Sometimes it was impossible to ignore the cheating was too obvious. It seems to be that way throughout some portions of Asia, not only the ROK (hong kong and china also had cheating “scandals”….in china parents actually committed violence when the system made it too difficult to cheat, example here:
https://qz.com/96793/chinese-students-and-their-parents-fight-for-the-right-to-cheat
The joke I’ve heard: “Bs stand for beatings in Asian families” has some truth to it.
When I was a student at UF most of my classes were in engineering (I was a chemistry major for my first degree). Many of the engineering students who came over from Asia brought their mothers who would cook and clean for them so they could dedicate all their time to studying.
No other culture is quite like this, and I suspect the test scores would be different for other societies if the paradigms were similar.
But I wouldn’t want to live like that…and I don’t think their results (outside of academic tests) are very good in the real world.
My spouse has a genius level IQ. His parents have genius level IQs (his dad, RIP, had an IQ of over 165…they didn’t test higher than that at the time…his mother 160). Mike’s IQ is about what his father’s was and our sons have never been tested exactly, but I would say it is probably about the same (our oldest married a homeschooled girl, also hispanic, with an almost perfect SAT score). I am basically the only non-genius in the family, but I’ve been surrounded by some of the smartest people in the world and made observations.
Pretty much in fall 1987 when I was applying for college (my senior year in high school) the Dean of Academics (guidance counselor) at my prepatory told me “community college or a lower end state school in New York State” (SUNY system).
I wanted to go to Dartmouth College, and even if I had the grades, the looks, the status…..my parents told me “we cant afford that college”
I had a tour and applied, denial letter came back three weeks after I applied. Was not surprised.
I applied to six colleges total. I got into three. I got accepted at SUNY Plattsburgh (also because I was a local of that state university….growing up in nearby Essex County), University of North Carolina at Greensboro and Green Mountain College in Vermont. I did not get accepted at Dartmouth, SUNY Albany and Skidmore College. If I didnt get into any, I was going to go to ACC (Adirondack Community College) and transfer into a four year college / university.
I knew boys in my prep school that could take a test on building an engine and get an A. I knew boys that could get A’s without studying. Apply that knowledge? Doubtful in many cases. I was a hot shot in social studies and history, yes I had to study hard but I also loved the subject so it wasnt work for me. I also read for readings sake, enjoyment. Mostly history and biography or famous people and their times. A lot of the smarter boys I went to school with found it “funny” to snap wet towels at their fellow boys butts in the locker room.
I hear a lot about how hard it is for higher IQ people in todays world. They get bored, our society doesnt cater to them…….usual excuses to cover for the fact their IQ is not as high as they purport or claim. High IQ people have a responsibility for their gift. I’ve seen maybe a couple of actual cases in my life when a high IQ person actually inspires me, or uplifts me to strive and do better.
I find IQ to be a basis, or an idea to help figure out where a person may or may not stand. High IQ folks have made it into a contest, and deemed anyone average or lower deemed to “serve” them or be blamed for something they could not control. They also make it out that you can “work real hard and improve it”, like they did (as if they did).
IQ like science took centuries to earn the respect it now holds in the culture, and within one generation we have turned it into a class thing. Shame of the high IQ folks for encouraging it and allowing that to happen.
I agree. This is well said.
What I dont like about IQ, and what it has become over the past 25 years or so…..
IQ of 99? Sorry. Get ready to work a drive-thru for the rest of your life.
If the measurement is really going to be “trusted” by the folks who put a lot of importance on it (those with higher than average IQ) it must then be understood that most people DO fall between the 110-90 range on IQ. Most people.
I am finding harder and harder to trust when every person I meet seems to have an IQ thats in the top 5%. If that is indeed the case, the test to me means little……for the fact all these smart, and brillinat and creative people seem to be powerless on all levels to lead, innovate and guide the rest of us.
ALso, I dont trust any IQ test except the Standford Binet r1973. I have been professionally administered three times. I believe its pretty accurate. Does it mean I am stupid? No. But I will admit some conceptual topics have been way over my head in other blogs. I read it and re-read it and it means nothing or I just dont understand. Especially charts and graphs.
High IQ people tend to have all the answers and yet cant explain or implement these ideas to people in the average range to understand. Which makes me question their own IQ’s.
Dr. Carl Sagan had a PBS series called “Cosmos” in the early 1980’s. I remember watching it and he was a very intelligent man but had a way of breaking down very complex topics of physics, chemistry, and the like for the layman to at least grasp. Where are these men today?
Everyone is brilliant, and gifted….but I still cant find mangers who can get to work on time.
Edward Dutton and Bruce G Charlton wrote a short book called “The Genius Famine” that addresses this question, borrowing heavily from the research of Dr. Michael A. Woodley. I’ve cited this work on a number of occasions.
That must be very interesting for you as the sort-of outsider. I don’t know that I’ve ever been with a family of geniuses. That’s an experience I’d like to have one day. I hope they have that rare combination of high IQ and high social functioning. Some have it, some don’t, and the latter are why high IQ individuals get a reputation for being…. off.
We have nothing quite so stratospheric in our family. Neither my wife and I have ever been tested, but we know what the kids are and can do basic comparisons to guess.
Met a gazillion high IQ folks. Met just as many who got “straight As” in school and have zero problem reminding you of that. Had to endure all through elementary school / high school the “talented and gifted” peers of mine reminding me of how talented and gifted they were.
And yet….and yet. 40 plus years later none have stopped the world. None are Elon Musk or Steve Jobs. None have turned the art or music world upside down. None are inventors or pioneers in their respected fields. Most are in the same income range I am in. More than a few are plain lazy (entitled bc they evidently have a high IQ, they shouldn’t have to work in something they don’t want to)
Having a high IQ doesn’t make one a good or better or nice person
Sir George Martin, Beatles producer was very talented. Musically inclined. Probably had perfect pitch, or close to it. Could read and score music. Could pretty much pick up and play most instruments.
He also put in fifteen hour days at work, and this was before producing the Beatles. Talent and gifts and IQ could not do it. Lots of hard work and dedication did ot too.
So many geniuses today, and I still can’t get managers, supervisors and workers who can even show up to work on time….
You are correct.
I’m not a genius, but the most influential thing that I ever did in the world was author Wikipedia’s “Template:Cite_web” (in 2004), which is now used in 8% of all Wikipedia articles (nearly 5 million). I am somewhat ambivalent about the outcome:
Not everything we do is well-known or even necessarily used for good. I took my propensity to cite my sources—which is evident on this blog—and more-or-less formally started the practice on Wikipedia. But was this a good thing? Who can say.
I no longer desire to change the world.
“That must be very interesting for you as the sort-of outsider”
It is (or was, I don’t think about it much after over 3 decades). It makes for some fun group games when we have family get togethers. But, candidly, it didn’t make me feel like an outsider…I actually felt smarter because they aren’t always right about everything. And Mike values my opinion very much on most matters (as do our boys). Sometimes I am right when he is wrong. Quite often over the course of all these years (though usually he is right).
“I hope they have that rare combination of high IQ and high social functioning”
They do, for the most part. His dad was very charismatic, but had trouble keeping friendships (or any close relationships) over time. He ended his own life eventually (about five years ago now, it hit Mike very hard).
Our oldest was probably the smartest (as far as testing). I started to teach him letters and so forth, but stopped when it seemed he would not be able to relate to other children. He was speaking in complete sentences at about 18 months. I didn’t want him to be “weird”…and I think for the most part I succeeded. He has many friends, and isn’t condescending to anyone at all.
By age 8, you could say a date and he would draw a very accurate map of the entire world, with its country boundaries, at that exact date.
He also memorized Janes (All the World’s Aircraft) manual at that age. It is volumous and one could just pick any aircraft and he could tell you anything about that plane.
An RAF pilot friend spent Thanksgiving with us that year and they were discussing some type of old British plane. Our son knew the exact capabilities and “payload” and all that…the RAF friend (no slouch, he was the first RAF F22 pilot in the world and owns a company now that has been on FOX news, Dan Robinson is his name) didn’t believe something he said, so he ran up to his room and brought out the book to verify accuracy.
Those were some fun parlor tricks back in the day, but we feel unbelievably blessed and fortunate he found a compatible wife and they value each other. They plan on homeschooling their (future, if God blesses them in this way) children.
Liz,
What interesting anecdotes. One of my “party tricks” is being able to count things after the fact. Once I went to a birthday party with my elementary school aged son and when I returned my wife asked me how many kids were there. I had no idea, so I told her to wait, closed my eyes, recalled the exact mental picture that I had captured, and counted how many were at the party. I suspect your relatives can do crazy stuff like that.
When I was a kid, my thing was baseball. I could tell you the exact statistics of various players during the baseball season (e.g. so and so had a batting average of .312), but I could never do something quite like your—obviously higher IQ—son.
I also know what it is like to have a child who is advanced. My son taught himself to read before he was in Kindergarten. He has also had perfect pitch since he was a young child.
My experience with high (and low) IQ individuals is that everyone has something to offer: nobody is always right.
Peace,
DR
Well said, although I think almost everything about popular genetics is science fiction.
Hi. This is off-topic, and I don’t know if you’re interested but I wrote the response post to Why are We in This Mess. Do check it out. Thanks.
https://sigmaframe.wordpress.com/2023/11/27/in-science-we-trust/
I don’t consider this to be off topic. Thank you for the link.
I should add (about my immersion experience in the ROK), this was the mid-90s timeframe, in Songtan/Pyeongtaek which were not large cities. Back then Seoul was a large city and very westernized (relatively), but the area we lived was “developing” (kind of 3rd worldesque). I’m sure things have changed a lot since then. I doubt parents are cheering as their toddlers play with broken glass today, but that is what I observed then.
Pingback: Sharkly on Women, Part 4
Pingback: Racial Segregation
Pingback: Talking About Old Women
Pingback: Substack