I am seeing a flaw in a fundamental assumption: that success is measured by the number of offspring. In our modern society, where pressures of physical survival are no longer a factor, this is simply no longer true. To think this through, here are the assumptons I am working with based upon previous conclusions:
The uneducated breed more than the educated due to lack of access or skill in contraception.
Lefty social programs protect the lowest rungs of society from the effects of physical danger, so that physical survival is possible by all and is no longer an evolutionary factor.
Educated parents typically produce educated children more so than uneducated parents due to availability of resources.
Education is not a sign of genetic disposition towards intelligence, but does benefit from it.
Intelligence is a factor in success, regardless of education or background (ie, an intelligent person from a poorly educated background may still find a way to become successful and raise their standing, their genetic advantage helping them to overcome the social disadvantage, and would be more likely to do so than a less intelligent person).
"Success" is not measured by survival, but how effective the person is in thw social games of humanity. That is, the aquisition of wealth and the progresion of learning.
One can conclude then the results of such a system will produce a large number of persons with less access to education and resources, and a smaller number of persons with a greater and greater access to resources. If smart families are successful and produce smart children who are also successful, then the control of resources remains in the hands of these families and their offspring. Selective breeding continues as the successful prefer to breed with the successful. Their numbers are smaller because the successful prefer fewer children. However, over generations, these more narrow gene lines continue to control more and more resources through their predeliction towards success.
In short, evolution is still working, and there is a form of natural selection at work. However, the results are not a larger number of members of that gene line, but a smaller number who are richer. The conclusion to be drawn is that by removing physical pressures from selection, the trend is reversed and evolution breeds towards singularity. The most "progressed" will control more resources, and be fewer in number. The results is a pyramid structure.
It should also be noted that for the more freely beeding uneducated at the bottom of the pyramid are not selecting unintelligence. They are, in fact, not selecting at all, by and large. They then hold the position of base gene pool from which those with predispositions towards success will occasionally arise and join the ranks of the few at the top. Natural selection is not present in this pool, save perhaps for base physical features preferred by current fashon.
So it is a fallicy to presume that evolution is not existent in our modern society, and that if it is, it is selecting unintelligence. It is present, and is selecting intelligence, but is producing smaller rather than larger numbers of those selected because numbers are no longer considered successful. Its quality over quantity. Evolution for us, it seems, breeds towards aristocracy. |
