Where do we go from here?

[canalon]

do you really think so? I can see many criminals and non-working people with plenty of kids. Contrary, they are overgrowing the "standard" population

Could you provide evidence for the "overgrowing" part of your post?
And I am curious to know whether you consider that this is necessarily a bad thing?

[skeptic]

Here in New Zealand it is clear that the criminal classes tend to have more kids than professionals. Prison is no barrier, since most felons end up in prison for such a short time. They leave their female partner pregnant, and living off the taxpayer as they go into prison, and make her pregnant again as soon as they get out.

[canalon]

The standard response for this is: Evidence or STFU.
You might perceive it like that, but that is not necessarily true. I cannot find it right now but I read that in the US the very rich tend to also have larger than average families. While the fecundity of the poor was rather low.
This is not to say that your theory is absolutely, wrong, but mostly that views based on anecdotes and prejudices have nothing to do on a scientific forum, and that if you want to make those assertions, you better support them with data.
In addition, poverty and 'criminal' behavior are things that are heavily influenced by the environment, more than genetics, and nothing proves that the criminals that you are complaining about are less intelligent or capable individuals than kids from luckier families. Once again this stress the need of good evidence rather than "anecdata" to support your claims.

[skeptic]

It is well known that criminals on average have IQ levels below that of 'normal' people.
http://law.jrank.org/pages/1363/Intelli ... ation.html

I quote :

"Terrie Moffitt and colleagues studied 4,552 Danish men born at the end of World War II. They examined intelligence test scores collected by the Danish army (for screening potential draftees) and criminal records drawn from the Danish National Police Register. The men who committed two or more criminal offenses by age twenty had IQ scores on average a full standard deviation below nonoffenders"

Mind you, there is a theory that high IQ criminals are simply the ones that don't get caught. Personally I think that high IQ criminals become lawyers and politicians.

[JackBean]

Mind you, there is a theory that high IQ criminals are simply the ones that don't get caught. Personally I think that high IQ criminals become lawyers and politicians.

canalon: I think you're little too much serious. But still. I know, what I'm talking about. But I cannot provide any formal data, because such would be immediately called "rasist".

And I'm not saying it can't be due to company around rather then low IQ, but it still doesn't change the point - that such people tend to have more kids than average.

[kolean]

Does this mean that 'where do we go from here' is towards criminal evolution?

Does that mean children from parents who biological brought them forth into this world, but by no means actually do any parenting since they are in prison for their criminal behavior, result to criminal behavior too?

And what does a 'criminal evolution' actually mean? Speculatively speaking/asking.

[skeptic]

kolean

Evolution is a very slow process. I am not concerned about the possible evolutionary trend towards criminality, low IQ, birth defects etc. That unconcern is because those trends take many generations, and long before that humanity will develop the genetic science required to counter such a trend.

[kolean]

I am not concerned about the possible evolutionary trend towards criminality, low IQ, birth defects etc. That unconcern is because those trends take many generations, and long before that humanity will develop the genetic science required to counter such a trend.

then who is going to develop the genetic science to counter such a trend?

[Wilddwarf]

Evolution is based upon natural selection. Natural selection is based upon who can survive long enough to pass on their genes. With war not as common as it once was, the current threat to survival in the major countries is crime. If you don't break the law, you have a lower chance of getting killed. If you do break the law, you have a higher chance of getting killed. If you are caught killing someone and are detained, those who enforce the law will kill you. You either have to kill to defend yourself, rely on the police to protect you, or learn some martial arts. If you have enough money, you can also get a good lawyer. So it's not such a matter of evolving towards crime, it's a matter of how you defend yourself from the threat of crime, and if necessary, how you avoid the threat of execution.

[JackBean]

the question is not, when will you die (or are killed), but how many kids you have. Why is it good to die at 80, if you had no kid? But one can also die at 30 and have already 5 kids...

[TheLoveLlama]

It is well known that criminals on average have IQ levels below that of 'normal' people.
http://law.jrank.org/pages/1363/Intelli ... ation.html

I quote :

"Terrie Moffitt and colleagues studied 4,552 Danish men born at the end of World War II. They examined intelligence test scores collected by the Danish army (for screening potential draftees) and criminal records drawn from the Danish National Police Register. The men who committed two or more criminal offenses by age twenty had IQ scores on average a full standard deviation below nonoffenders"

Mind you, there is a theory that high IQ criminals are simply the ones that don't get caught. Personally I think that high IQ criminals become lawyers and politicians.

The evidence you are quoting is correlative evidence. This means it cannot imply any causation of that people with low IQ's commit more crimes or vice versa. Also I personally believe that the use of most IQ tests as a measure of intelligence (i.e. pure intelligence from a genetic basis) is extremely ineffective since a persons socio economic status, environment, upbringing, mental health, etc. can have a big influence on their ability to perform well on a "IQ test". This means that people with 'low IQ scores' having more children than people with 'high IQ scores' may have no influence on the evolution of intelligence. You would have to prove that people with low IQ scores have more children (or commit more crimes) than people with high IQ scores with every other factor being held constant (e.g. parental care, learning opportunities, traumatic life events, etc.).

[skeptic]

Llama

Bearing in mind that ethics prevent us carrying out breeding experiments on humans, correlation is about all the evidence you are likely to see. I agree that it is not 'proof' of anything.

As I keep harping on, though, it matters not. Evolution is a slow process, taking thousands or tens of thousands of years. Deliberate genetic manipulation will likely be widespread within hundreds of years, if not decades.