Will there be enough smart people in the future for science to

File: 1447521921760.png (264KB, 647x437px) Image search: [Google]

264KB, 647x437px

>>7723073
Smart people are being excluded from reproduction. Women choose to mate with the most brutal and anti-intellectual of all males. Sexual selection favors douchebaggery over intellect. Smart people will go extinct within the next generation. Welcome to idiocracy.

>>7723077

>I'm so smart I still can't find out how to attract a female

>Literally everyone who has had sexual intercourse must fit within a specific portion of the bell curve that is coincidentally just below where i stand

Fucking neckbeards.

>>7723077
So is this a cycle humans go through? We made it too easy for the dumb people?

>>7723090
Are you really this disconnected from reality? It's a fact that less intelligent people have more kids.

>>7723090
It's true though. Women are attracted to tall loud douchebags. They despise intellectual males. They show open contempt for men with academic ambitions. Scientists and mathematicians are being despised as "boring nerds". The average woman would always prefer a superficially charming drug dealer on the dance floor as a potential mating partner over an intelligent STEM graduate. This isn't a neckbeardism, this is the sad reality we live in.

>>7723108
>>7723104
>>7723077


You guys are all undergrads I assume. In grad school most people get married or have gfs, at least in my field.

>>7723077
>implying it's ever been any other way
>conflating intelligence and access to education
>literally whining like a bitch that women don't like you

>>7723108
Whiny bitch.

>>7723121
> most people get married or have gfs
But never reproduce. In fact vasectomies and and keking is common.

>>7723122
>>implying it's ever been any other way
It was different before slut culture became popular. It was different before tinder, clubs, festivals and Hollywood dogma ruined this generation.

>>conflating intelligence and access to education
Access to education is free for everyone where I live. The majority of students at university are intellectually not qualified for their degree, or for any degree at all. Hence why I was talking about intelligence in my post.

>>literally whining like a bitch that women don't like you
Love is a fundamental human need, like eating, sleeping or hygiene. Would you not be upset when everyone was denying you access to food?

>>7723135
>It was different before slut culture became popular. It was different before tinder, clubs, festivals and Hollywood dogma ruined this generation.

Yeah, remember the good ol' days of mediveal Europe when the smartest guys got all the ladies? Oh wait, the smartest guys ended up autistically poring over manuscripts in monasteries or becoming celibate priests.

>>7723121
>at least in my field.
Gender studies doesn't count.

>>7723073
Dysgenics trends for IQ can be found among almost every group on the planet, but luckily genetic engineering might fix the issue.

>>7723077
Its because high-IQ women get educated, and education is negatively correlated with fertility.

>>7723140
At least in medieval Europe virginity was still something valuable, and women didn't have their pussy pounded by a different guy's dick every day from tinder or from the club.

>>7723077
I don't think we even understand intelligence well enough to think it's as simple as smart people have smart kids and stupid people have stupid kids. Otherwise if you think the low-intelligence of the middle ages happened by selectively breeding out the intelligent, how were they ever bred back in? When has selection ever favored the intelligent?

Don't even try and tell me it favored the intelligent before the dawn of civilization and survival of the fittest and all that shit. Yeah intelligence at a rudimentary level, but when a 40 IQ, 95 IQ and 150+ genius are all attacked by a wild pack of wolves I think it's safe to say only the 40 is at a disadvantage and it comes down to who can fucking climb trees the best.

>>7723091
>yfw present human civilization was built on the ruins of a previous civilization that fell because of the dumbing down of the society

>>7723162

I think the simple explanation is that intelligence is relative, and natural selection favored intelligence within a certain range. Obviously women aren't going to be attracted to literal drooling retards, and societies with the intelligence of goldfish will be steamrolled by societies with competent people, so there is a 'floor' for intelligence.

>>7723162
>I don't think we even understand intelligence well enough to think it's as simple as smart people have smart kids and stupid people have stupid kids.
Yes we can, if you accepta that IQ is a measure of intelligence.

>When has selection ever favored the intelligent?
Fertility among Ashkenazi Jews definitely favoured intelligence.

>>7723162
Intelligence is a disadvantageous trait because of sexual selection which favors unintelligent men. Intelligent men were always an outlier and an evolutionary dead-end. Merely a mutation for one generation which - as a byproduct - led to scientific advancement. But never was intelligence actively selected for.

>>7723162
>When has selection ever favored the intelligent?

constantly throughout history, with the notable exception of the last few decades.

>>7723179
>Intelligence is a disadvantageous trait because of sexual selection which favors unintelligent men.
What makes you say this? AFAIK IQ itself is neither positive or negative.

>>7723182

Yeah, remember all those stories about how many women Pythagoras seduced, or how many children Plato had? Or that time Epictetus got a whole town of women pregnant? Oh wait they were all loners and Diogenes was a renowned masturbator.

>>7723189
Are you seriously using philosophers as examples of intelligence? Seriously? Go back to >>>/lit/ you non-STEM pleb.

>>7723198

Pythagoras was a mathematician in addition to being a philosopher. 1/3rd of Aristotle's writings were on the anatomy of animals.

>>7723200
>Pythagoras was a mathematician in addition to being a philosopher.
Number mysticism isn't math. He was a cultist and the theorem carrying his name wasn't even discovered by him.

>1/3rd of Aristotle's writings were on the anatomy of animals.
And almost everything of it turned out to be wrong.

>>7723176
That's what I'm getting at, I just think the floor is higher than a lot of the people in this thread are implying.

>>7723182
Yeah favoured basic intelligence, but it has never rewarded the kind of exception that it takes make serious groundbreaking technological or scientific advancement.

>>7723203

OK, fine. Do you think Greek women were wetting their panties over Archimedes' inventions?

>>7723203
lol egdy