Bill, Two good ones.
Perhaps we need Federal Vouchers for higher education? Harry ------------------------------------------------ William wrote: >Harry, > >I have been associated with some good schools and some mediocre ones and >can attest that doctoral degrees are more a measure of tenacity than any >basic intelligence. Why is it that Michael Dell and Bill Gates could drop >out as undergraduates and do so well? In fact, Gates dropped out a year >earlier than Dell which might account for why he is doing so well. What >do the say?: 'A' students teach 'B' students to work for 'C' students. > >For those interested in higher ed, here is a sobering column: > > >http://www.sptimes.com/2002/10/04/Columns/New_system_has_higher.shtml > >Bill Ward > >On Wed, 02 Oct 2002 17:01:51 -0700 Harry Pollard ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Keith, > > > > Heinlein wrote about this in a short story - the marching Morons - > > in which > > the speedometers of the cars showed 70 - but the car was only going > > 30. As > > I recall, the world was being run - to protect the low IQs - from an > > > > underground complex under Antarctica. > > > > That must have been 20-30 years ago. > > > > Yet, it's just science-fiction. > > > > The professional class are trapped in their necessary debts - > > mortgage, > > insurance, university costs. They can't really get out from under - > > at > > least not while they feel responsibilities on their backs. > > > > Also, IQ's are not everything. Many PhD's are hired by people who > > haven't > > finished high school. > > > > I remember some years ago a Canadian article that pointed out that > > not one > > of the Canadian bank presidents across the Dominion had completed > > university. (How do you like Dominion, fellers!) > > > > Some might say: "So that's why we have the problems." > > > > True or not, I think that high IQ's as related to professional > > competence > > are not the be all, and end all, of the discussion. > > > > There are certainly gradations of competence, no matter the IQ or > > the > > educational qualifications, of people. Maybe - and here's a thought > > - there > > are super-people who really keep everything going in spite of the > > less than > > competent majority of high IQ's. > > > > I had better stop. I'm frightening myself. > > > > Harry > > ___________________________________________ > > > > Keith wrote: > > > > >Mike, > > > > > >At 09:34 01/10/02 -0600, you wrote: > > >(KH) > > > >> The one big argument against this bifurcation becoming > > permanent is > > > >> demographic -- that inter-racial mixing (and thus inter-IQ) > > mixing due to > > > >> immigration is occurring at a faster rate than physical (and > > breeding) > > > >> separation (hitherto required for speciation). It is clearly > > true that > > > >> high-IQ parents at the present time are having fewer children at > > far less > > > >> than replacement rates (and so are all other parents in > > developed > > > >> countries). Nevertheless, the pace of innovation means that > > high-IQ > > > >> individuals with high level technocratic skills is becoming > > increasingly > > > >> required. One result of this seems to be that income > > differentials are > > > >> growing within developed countries. > > >(MH) > > > >What about the regression to the mean? Not all children of > > > >high IQ parents have high IQs and not all children of low IQ > > parents > > > >have low IQs. > > > > > >Yes, I'm fully aware of this -- and it's yet another factor which I > > should > > >have mentioned when I talked of differential demographic trends > > which are > > >tending to reduce the average IQ of a population. However, it's the > > latter > > >trend which is more important at present, and my hypothesis implies > > that > > >the present situation of differential replacement rates (as between > > high-IQ > > >and others) is not necessarily permanent. > > > > > >One doesn't have to speculate too wildly to suppose that at some > > period in > > >the future (due to higher energy costs or climatic change or some > > other > > >factor) survival will be much more difficult than now. For the last > > 100 > > >years or so, mankind has had an exceptionally comfortable time due > > to > > >fossil fuels. > > > > > >Leaving that on one side for the moment, I think we can say with > > reasonable > > >certainty that embryo selection (e-s) will continue apace for three > > >reasons: (a) as a byproduct of IVF for infertile couples, (b) > > elective e-s > > >for avoiding deleterious alleles, and (c) selective e-s for > > desirable genes > > >or gene clusters. This by itself will tend to be adopted by the > > high-IQ > > >portion of the population rather than the low IQs for reasons of > > both > > >finance and more purposeful parentage. > > > > > >Let's also assume that biogenetics will enable selected embryos to > > be taken > > >right through fetus stage and then to full term in vitro! This is > > not > > >improbable. This is almost certainly a lesser problem than the > > selection of > > >high-IQ gene clusters (or other chosen traits) which is probably > > more > > >distant. Now let me return to the likelihood of a period of great > > economic > > >stress. In my opinion, high-IQ mothers (that is, those who tend to > > have > > >interesting, well-paid jobs) would readily revert to the > > aristocratic > > >practices of the past in delegating the upbringing of their > > children to > > >nurses (who are likely to be relatively lowly paid). In that > > situation, > > >high-IQ parents could have a large number of children without > > personal > > >inconvenience, and thus reverse the present differential > > replacement rates. > > >(It has astonished me in England to see how quickly the > > middling-rich have > > >taken to employ au pairs and nursery nurses in recent years.) > > > > > >Now all this may seem highly speculative, depending on too many > > "ifs" but > > >if you believe, as I do, for one or other of several probable > > reasons, that > > >harder times *are* coming and yet, at the same time, high-IQ people > > (as > > >everybody else, of course) want to retain the standards and > > luxuries that > > >they have at present, then it's vitally necessary that society as a > > whole > > >is able to maintain its high-tech systems. It isn't inevitable, of > > course > > >-- I suppose it's conceivable that high-IQ people might say (of > > their > > >higher-responsibility jobs -- and working longer hours than anybody > > else > > >[as now seems to be occurring] ) "the game isn't worth the candle" > > and give > > >up, and thus society as a whole winds down to lower levels of > > skills and > > >standard of existence relevant to the newer circumstances (as, say > > >Australian aborigines when game animals were wiped out and in their > > >subsequent simpler environment -- and Tasmanians even more so.) > > > > > >However, I suggest that this would not happen. Even if the high-IQ > > portion > > >of the population decided to give up the burden of supporting all > > the rest, > > >they would not cut off their own noses. They would use every trick > > in the > > >book to so arrange government and society so that they, at least, > > >maintained a high standard of living -- and also that they would be > > >self-sustaining in numbers. > > > > > >(MH) > > > >Also, there is more to intelligence and effectiveness > > > >than what is measured by IQ. The neurobiologist William Calvin > > in "A Brain > > > >For All Seasons" argues that sudden coolings of climate selected > > for humans > > > >and societies best able to share and collaborate, which suggests > > that > > > >Gardners Interpersonal Intelligence may be man's most important > > selected > > > >trait, not capacity for abstract reasoning. > > > > > >This may very well have been important, and even crucial at these > > >particular times of sudden coolings. But unless this Gardner factor > > is > > >measurable we will never know. It's more likely in my opinion that > > this > > >factor would be correlated to a greater or lesser extent with the > > general > > >g-factor measured by IQ tests, inherited and selected over very > > long > > >evolutionary periods even before the emergence of homo sapiens. > > > > > > >Why the concern over a sudden cooling? Because that is what may > > happen. > > > >Climatologists have been puzzled by the sudden severe little ice > > age > > > >of the Younger Dryas 12,500 BP to 12,000 BP but have finally > > figured > > > >out how they think it happened. They are brought on by warmings > > that > > > >melt sufficient ice to flood the North Atlantic with fresh water > > and > > > >stop the Atlantic Conveyor and hence the Gulf Stream, which keeps > > Europe > > > >and Eastern North America warm in winter. They have also figured > > out from > > > >ice cores that similar sudden coolings have happened hundreds of > > times > > > >before. Each time human populations would have crashed - been > > heavily > > > >selected - for cooperation in the face of great adversity. > > > > > > > >The Woods Hole Oceanographic has been keeping track of the > > salinity of > > > >the North Atlantic and is now sounding the alarm that it has > > fallen > > > >far enough to be concerned about a Conveyor stoppage. > > > >http://www.whoi.edu/home/about/whatsnew_abruptclimate.html > > > > > > > >How severe it might be is another question. They are suggesting > > an annual > > > >average drop for Europe of 5 degrees F, enough to freeze ports > > and > > > >shipping lanes and cause crops to fail. > > > > > > > >That would be more severe than the Little Ice Age, so I am > > sceptical. Severe > > > >sudden coolings in the past were associated with deglaciation, so > > the > > > >amounts of fresh water involved were enormous, much larger than > > Greenland > > > >and Arctic sea ice could produce today. What may be more likely > > according > > > >to two Swiss climatologists (Stockner and Schmittner) is a > > slowing of the > > > >Conveyor with occasional brief cessations of one of the three > > downwelling > > > >sites. That would lead to a slight cooling trend with short > > somewhat > > > >cooler variations from trend. > > > > > > > >As always, there are other data to muddy the waters. These > > sudden coolings, > > > >at least for the past 10,000 years that we have data, are also > > coincident > > > >with reductions in the amount of energy radiated by the sun. > > Right now > > > >solar radiation is in an up cycle. > > > > > > > >Ain't life interesting. > > > > > >The above comments on the Conveyor effect are extremely > > interesting. I was > > >aware of it, of course, but haven't been as closely in touch with > > >discussion about it as you've obviously been. > > > > > >Keith ****************************** Harry Pollard Henry George School of LA Box 655 Tujunga CA 91042 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel: (818) 352-4141 Fax: (818) 353-2242 *******************************
--- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.393 / Virus Database: 223 - Release Date: 9/30/2002
