Your Thoughts on Idiocracy (NOT THE MOVIE)

[Australian rePublic]

https://www.pri.org/stories/2013-05-25/ ... study-says
https://www.yahoo.com/news/blogs/sidesh ... 34194.html
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-06/a ... ly/8098028
https://www.smh.com.au/cqstatic/gwsaer/unicef.JPG
https://www.smh.com.au/education/un-age ... wrt9u.html
http://theconversation.com/six-ways-aus ... kids-32958

I am not talking about the movie. I am talking about the society. Whilst you can refer to the movie in order to discuss the society, this discussion is ultimately about the society of idiocracy. For those of you who don't know, the theory states that if the people with lower IQ keep breading, and the people with higher IQs keep abstaining from breeding, humanity will get stupid, ridiculously stupid. Me personally, I don't think so. Whilst Western society may be getting stupider, and in fact studies have shown that the average intelligence of Westerns has dropped 14.1 IQ points since the Victorian era (before you accuse me of pulling figures out of my arse, read the articles I provided). That's 1.23 IQ points per decade. Holy shit, if I had power, I would gather the nation's experts and force them to find a solution to the eventual dumbing down of society. The study blames that people with lower IQs having more babies than those with higher IQs. I didn't know intelligence was genetic, but okay then. HOWEVER, this only applies to the Western World. I'm not sure how other societies are going the same way. Further, I think there might be a larger gap, where we had a group of super intelectuals who rule over everything and the dummies who will make up the bulk of society. I was actually surprised about how a movie which discussed the dumbing down of the world failed to mention the existance of anything outside of the USA, so, yea... But on the other hand, that movie is quite elitist.

Another thing I think is responsible is our piece of shit education system. The most recent study ranked Australia 39 out of 41 countries, below Latvia and Lithuania (once again, read the articles) which is an EXTREME decline. As someone who finished my secondary schooling less than 5 years, I kept saying that our education system is a piece of shit, and I am glad that this study has happened, which forced the government to pull its head out of its arse and do something about it.

In my opinion, idiocracy may happen (maybe not as extreme as the movie, but to some degree), unless we actively do something to stop it. However, I believe that there will be a group of super-intelectuals who will rule over the common stupid folk. I think that this will be a problem specific to the Western world, however, causing the rest of the world to either interveen and do something, or ignore the Western World entirely. What do you think?

[New Emeline]

For those of you who don't know, the theory states that if the people with lower IQ keep breading

I don't see the problem with less intelligent people coating food in breadcrumbs.

[Australian rePublic]

For those of you who don't know, the theory states that if the people with lower IQ keep breading

I don't see the problem with less intelligent people coating food in breadcrumbs.

Until you get a whole society of people who don't know which hole to put a peg into, think that it's a good idea to water crops with a sports drink and don't know the answer to the question "if you have a bucket which carries 9 gallons of water and another bucket which carries 7 gallons of water, how many buckets do you have?"

[Irou]

The obvious solution is eugenics, gene modification, breeding humans like animals, massive cultural change in order to make the less intelligent an sterile underclass etc

[Australian rePublic]

I'm starting to realise how elitist the movie really is

[Dogmeat]

[New Emeline]

I don't see the problem with less intelligent people coating food in breadcrumbs.

Until you get a whole society of people who don't know which hole to put a peg into, think that it's a good idea to water crops with a sports drink and don't know the answer to the question "if you have a bucket which carries 9 gallons of water and another bucket which carries 7 gallons of water, how many buckets do you have?"

I was making a joke
you misspelled "breeding" as "breading"

[Irou]

I'm starting to realise how elitist the movie really is

It's not that elitist it's rational but still a comedy

[New Emeline]

The obvious solution is eugenics, gene modification, breeding humans like animals, massive cultural change in order to make the less intelligent an sterile underclass etc

how about no

[Irou]

The obvious solution is eugenics, gene modification, breeding humans like animals, massive cultural change in order to make the less intelligent an sterile underclass etc

how about no

How about yes

[New Emeline]

how about no

How about yes

Gene modification is the only one on there that I don't vehemently disagree with

[Dogmeat]

The obvious solution is eugenics, gene modification, breeding humans like animals, massive cultural change in order to make the less intelligent an sterile underclass etc

I'm okay with this if by, "breeding humans like animals," you mean catgirls.

[Quency]

Mutation, that is the blind alteration of the genome by the unthinking forces of nature, is far more likely to harm the organism than it is to allow for the emergence of desirable traits to further its fitness. The filter of natural selection separates the undesirable from the desirable mutations as a result of mathematical inevitability, as undesirable traits reproduce themselves less than desirable traits by definition. In the post-industrial civilisation we have inherited the ability for this filter is hindered by the development of the conditions that have allowed for almost all of those born into to reproduce successfully, hindered only by their own will. This means the emergence of undesirable traits will outpace the emergence of or retainment of desirable traits in the population, until it has degenerated so thoroughly through this process that the population is no longer capable of maintaining these conditions.

[Irou]

Mutation, that is the blind alteration of the genome by the unthinking forces of nature, is far more likely to harm the organism than it is to allow for the emergence of desirable traits to further its fitness. The filter of natural selection separates the undesirable from the desirable mutations as a result of mathematical inevitability, as undesirable traits reproduce themselves less than desirable traits by definition. In the post-industrial civilisation we have inherited the ability for this filter is hindered by the development of the conditions that have allowed for almost all of those born into to reproduce successfully, hindered only by their own will. This means the emergence of undesirable traits will outpace the emergence of or retainment of desirable traits in the population, until it has degenerated so thoroughly through this process that the population is no longer capable of maintaining these conditions.

This

[Dumb Ideologies]

The obvious solution is eugenics, gene modification, breeding humans like animals, massive cultural change in order to make the less intelligent an sterile underclass etc

I'm okay with this if by, "breeding humans like animals," you mean catgirls.

This post receives the coveted Iron Paw of Approval.

[Aggicificicerous]

Mutation, that is the blind alteration of the genome by the unthinking forces of nature, is far more likely to harm the organism than it is to allow for the emergence of desirable traits to further its fitness. The filter of natural selection separates the undesirable from the desirable mutations as a result of mathematical inevitability, as undesirable traits reproduce themselves less than desirable traits by definition. In the post-industrial civilisation we have inherited the ability for this filter is hindered by the development of the conditions that have allowed for almost all of those born into to reproduce successfully, hindered only by their own will. This means the emergence of undesirable traits will outpace the emergence of or retainment of desirable traits in the population, until it has degenerated so thoroughly through this process that the population is no longer capable of maintaining these conditions.

If a new trait doesn't lower reproductive output, then it's not negative.

[Quency]

If a new trait doesn't lower reproductive output, then it's not negative.

Only from the reproductive standpoint, not a rational or moral one. If propensity to rape increased reproductive fitness would that be not negative?

[The Huskar Social Union]

Eh it was alright

edit: Just realised it was not about the movie, i should wait a bit till im a bit more awake before i go on here.

[MERIZoC]

r/iamverysmart

[Aggicificicerous]

If a new trait doesn't lower reproductive output, then it's not negative.

Only from the reproductive standpoint, not a rational or moral one. If propensity to rape increased reproductive fitness would that be not negative?

You said that mutations are far more likely to harm the organism than further its fitness. Harm means that the organism's fitness is lowered, i.e. lower reproductive output.

[Pilarcraft]

TFW you're so mad nobody sleeps with you that you start claiming "Everyone's becoming stupider!" and "if stupids breed we'll die out!"

[Quency]

You said that mutations are far more likely to harm the organism than further its fitness. Harm means that the organism's fitness is lowered, i.e. lower reproductive output.

Yes, I did say that. This does not mean that traits that further reproductive fitness are necessarily positive, nor that harm reproductive fitness negative.

TFW you're so mad nobody sleeps with you that you start claiming "Everyone's becoming stupider!" and "if stupids breed we'll die out!"

Uhh... you realise people don't sleep around for purposes of reproduction, yea? In fact, that's kind of one of the biggest fears people have when they have promiscuous sex.
That's what marriage is for, and I can trust you most of those who complain about the opposite sex are looking more for the former than the latter.

[Caracasus]

Given that we've known for quite a while now that birthrates seem to decrease as a population becomes more "developed" - with a higher standard of living and better education/access to healthcare it might be an idea to look at the material conditions maybe, before going down the whole eugenics route.

I mean, education and development kinda works, but eugenics really doesn't.

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

IQ was first proposed as a measurement in 1912. It is not useful to measure intelligence, and it is impossible to say that IQ has declined since the victorian era, since IQ was not developed back then.

[Ethel mermania]

For those of you who don't know, the theory states that if the people with lower IQ keep breading

I don't see the problem with less intelligent people coating food in breadcrumbs.

See this right h3re is part of the issue. Fried food raises both blood sugar, and cholesterol levels in the blood, which long term effect brain function. Breading the food is a direct cause of this issue and this meanace must be stopped.