At 09:39 PM 2/2/02 -0600 The Fool wrote:
>Large populations:
>
>http://www.observer.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,644002,00.html
>
Something jumped out at me from this article:
"For example, the biologist Christopher Wills, of the University of
California, San Diego, argues that ideas are now driving our evolution.
'There is a premium on sharpness of mind and the ability to accumulate
money. Such people tend to have more children and have a better chance of
survival,' he says. In other words, intellect - the defining characteristic
of our species - is still driving our evolution. "
Actually, I would argue the opposite - very intelligent and rich families
are more likely to use contraception and thus limit their number of births.
For example, anecdotally speaking, it seems to me that childless couples
are almost always fairly wealthy and intelligent couples. Indeed, when
one thinks of a "power couple" one tends to think of the family having one
child or maybe two. Large families - with five or more children,
however, I tend to almost always associate with families working in middle
class and lower middle class professions.
So, is this "contraception differential" going to affect human evolution?
I don't know, but I can honestly say that I am somehow not worried about it
all - unlike an eugenicist or two I have run across in my time. And who
knows, maybe eventually it will populate the US with a bunch of pro-life
Catholics! ;-)
JDG
__________________________________________________________
John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - ICQ #3527685
"Our campaign against international terrorism does not represent some
sort of 'clash of civilizations.' Instead, it is a clash between
civilization and those who would destroy it." -Amb. Richard N. Haass
