shaun2000 has not written any posts yet.
Thank you, I appreciate your responding. You make me realize that this alone can't have much value as it stands, it can have value only if and when others make something out of it. I've no idea how to make that worth anyone's while. I can do only this, I can't take it any further.
I wish to demonstrate that study using the methods of the arts and humanities can make progress when science seems to have stalled, as it seems to have on the subject of what it means we evolved. If science feels no responsibility for answering that question then I think it is time for the humanities to step forward. But who in the humanities could take over where I leave off? Which department would most likely volunteer?
I think IQ not mattering is becoming a live issue. The votes of people with IQ below 100 carry as much weight as those of people with IQ above 100. If the <100IQ cohort voted as a bloc for the kind of society they prefer, a lower IQ could make for a more satisfying life. The world seems to be dividing itself along pre- and post-enlightenment lines, eg pro-Trump and anti-Trump, and IQ seems to be valued less in the former. Rejection of enlightenment values, of individuality and intelligence, may become discounted so heavily in the future that they become toxic. Productivity and innovation might then be criticized for making it