Kevin Kostlan
2
4
Kevin Kostlan has not written any posts yet.
Kevin Kostlan has not written any posts yet.
Hunter-gathering probably needed skills that are harder to AI-replace *for the common individual* even if farmer societies can use their greater numbers to accumulate more technology. This is because farmer societies move around less and have more specialized labor, making life require more narrower tasks and less general problem solving. That latter is what we call "intelligence". The 21st century is reversing this trend rapidly with automation.
Farming existed almost all over the world for long enough for natural selection to matter but not enough for our DNA and cultures to completely "forget" life as a hunter gatherer. Modern society is (most likely) a mix of ~10 hunter-gather phenotypes to ~90 farmers. The... (read more)
The sample size isn't big enough: nearby countries are too strongly coupled with each-other. Regions are closer to independent. But the only major regions were Europe, Middle East, East Asia, India, West Africa, East Africa, South Africa, and several in the new world. It's hard to form statistics around such a small number.
Of these, four enjoyed "top of the world" civilization status at some point in time: the Middle East + North Africa, Europe, China, and India. Mesoamerica lived independently until it got destroyed by Europe, so it is hard to place in a global hierarchy. This list is pretty random; there is no evidence for or against an "avoidance of the... (read more)
How are measuring intelligence? Most of the WAIS puts machines far, far ahead of humans. This includes block design, arithmetic, digit symbol, anything that tests memory, etc.
Why do we care about intelligence? We actually care about "mental skills humans have that machines can't yet replace". Measuring this doesn't seem easy, especially if the WAIS favors machines so much.
Why are the IQ's Mensa levels when unlike mensa we don't have a cutoff? This is a *strong* self-selection effect.