The previous article, Why Should Darwinism be Capitalistic?, invited criticism from many of my ‘evolutionist’ friends. Some were against the anti-deterministic underpinnings of the article – they were reluctant to come to terms with the ‘Nature via Nurture’ hypothesis. Others were against my suggestion that Darwinism can be supportive of Socialism rather than capitalism. What most of them complained about was my support of the job and educational reservations to weaker sections of the society.
So here are some clarifications on the issue. These are excerpts from email replies, orkut messages and internet chats. They represent my attempts to detail the:
- the influence of environment on gene expression (nature via nurture).
- the use of neo-darwinian evolutionary principles to fight nature’s selection forces.
- the concept of all-round social upliftment for maximum expression of best genes.
- the necessity of social reservation and proactive steps to uplift the backward sects of each population.
An analogy to ponder over
Imagine, two pots, with randomly allocated seeds from the same batch. The two plots have equivalent genetic potential. One plot received fertilizer (an environmental condition), the other pot receives no fertilizer. The average height (i.e. intelligence) differences between each pot will be due to environmental differences (fertilizer), however the height differences amongst individual plants within a pot are due to genetic differences (assuming similar conditions throughout the pot).
Which set of plants have a better chance of disseminating their progeny..?
Which set of plants can ensure that most of their “good” genes are transferred to the next generation ?
Progeny of which set of plants are more likely to survive with the better genes ?
Analysis
The gene for higher intellect (henceforth called “smart-gene”) definitely appears in a family/clan/race as a result of mutation and random chance, as evolutionary laws say.
Let me elaborate this:
A child named ‘Z’ in a family of traditional cobblers in India in 800 AD gets a few smart-genes. He has this constant urge to learn, enjoy philosophy or engage in intellectual pursuits. But the strict caste system and social practices of untouchability forbids him from following his heart. Even his family which doesn’t care about education is against his wishes and the boy is compelled to follow his father’s profession, marry somebody from his own caste and spend his life in the way, the strict society wanted him.
His wife, who is from a plain ordinary cobbler family, has no smart-genes. Now our “index” case of smart-gene-mutant is Mr.Z, who has very very small chance of passing his mutant smart-genes to his son or daughter. But still, let us simply suppose the genes were fortunately inherited by Mr.Z’s son. But even then, the son too has very little chance of passing that to the third generation because of the same socioeconomic set up that prevented his father from achieving his own dreams. If he defies the society, the family will soon be destroyed even before a third or fourth generation of children is born.
What if Z’s daughter is the one who inherits the smart-genes? The prospects are worse for a woman in such a rigidly hierarchical and casteist society!!
As long as the same socioeconomic conditions prevail around the family, the smart-genes find less and less chance of inheritance.
Note that there is no inheritance of acquired characters here.
The smart-genes simply rose as a result of “random aimless mutation” as Dawkins often puts it.
The only factor that environment strongly influences, is its chance of being inherited into the subsequent generation.
This situation is a kind of ‘man-made’ negative selection.
The same way we weed out poor yielding poultry or sheep from a farm.
The same way dogs, which are epitomes of servitude and fidelity, were selectively evolved from wolves
Now consider the same situation in a modern liberal Western society like the USA.
The modern Mr. Z, who inherits the smart-genes, takes a scholarship exam, pursues a college education, research in Duke, become a top rated cardiologist in North Carolina and marries the daughter of his research guide. Now his children have because his wife is likely to have the same in her gene pool too. Now, since his wife’s family has a history of intellectual members, the odds of her transmitting the smart-genes to the next generation are also higher. In whichever way you look, Mr. Z’s progeny will have greater chance of inheriting their parents’ smart-genes.
The atmosphere, in which their children grow up, will be stimulation to their genetic potentials. Better nutrition, visuo-spacial challenges of the city and top class education bring the best out of those old smart-genes.
These children, who seek out their own kind (Dawkin’s “green beard effect”) in the society, marry from families of similar or higher intellectual status. The odds of their successive generations becoming smarter improve with every generation.
Note that our Mr. Z of the21st century American city not only faces zero resistance from society but enjoys the fruits of liberty, equality and government’s financial aid in the form of grants, job reservations, scholarships, insurance etc.
This situation is beautifully condensed in the very famous FLYNN EFFECT.
Dr. James Flynn, after doing a meta-analysis of many Western IQ studies done over generations, plotted it against time, and found that average IQ scores increase with generations in the Western societies.
The reason for this is not because the earlier generations had no smart-genes. It’s just that modern western societies are more liberal & conducive for the better expression of these genes to their fullest potentials.
They permit mix up of all kinds, resulting in a global improvement of intellect rather than focal areas of brain development.
That is the most important thing about supporting reservation and other social initiatives to uplift all the sections of population rather than letting natural selection take its toll.
A short verbal ability test administered to about 12,500 adult American Blacks and whites between 1974 and 1994 support this effect of social influence. It clearly shows a narrowing of the IQ differences over recent years – a telltale sign of positive influence on gene expression.
Defying Natural Selection
It may seem strange that in highly competitive meritocratic modern societies, natural selection actually has very little toll on the individual.
If you look deeper, you will see the reason.
With the general improvement in intelligence, human societies progressively have (and will) become altruistic. It’s the selfish gene’s covert strategy to promote the survival of its own kind.
Our hospitals, medical equipments, diagnostic gadgetry, ever expanding array of drugs, humanitarian organizations, peace organizations, trade partnerships etc are towering examples of this altruism and a blatant defiance of Natural Selection.
I am not forgetting the resurgences in imperialist notions especially in recent war histories, but those can be dispensed as the old animal instinct still refusing to go off the skin.
Once the concept of “Nation” and “Nationality” wither away in the future, such notions will have no meaning at all. And by that time hominids, as a species will have something else to fight against…!
Reservation Issue
The whole meaning of reservation, scholarships and grants is to promote the maximal expression of the good genes in these oppressed castes and sects. For that, first of all, there should be some potentially smart genes that can be worked upon to be fully expressible. This means, we can’t expect the whole of those backward castes to ascend to an equal stance with the rest of the society within a very short period of time, simply from affirmative actions. Affirmative actions should essentially be followed by two things if it’s to yield rapid results: # 1) Positive change in social psyche, in accepting them and acknowledging their contributions. # 2) General increase in equality and opportunities for all.
That’s when we can claim that the society has become truly meritocratic.
The reservation of seats at the IITs and institutions of excellence is a complex issue. But one thing can be said. Setting apart 20 or 30% seats to the backward classes will not take away any opportunity from the general merit-class. Because, they already are evolutionarily advanced to seek and earn their share. They are already advanced intellectually. What i mean to say is that, economic independence and wealth do not solve the issue at all. The root problem is in the genes, and the remedy requires more than just a few perks to a few individuals. Mixing their genome with the general population will be the ultimate cure, but that would be too fantastic for an expectation in our society.
Spin-offs on Eugenics
I believe, we all have to learn to tolerate the current diversity of our species. We might have to accept the reality of religion-genes, criminality-genes, racism-genes, communism-genes, capitalism-genes, atheism- genes, agnosticism-genes, and what not for that matter. Within our species, each of these has a time and place – to dominate, to stagnate and even to whither away or may be even replaced by totally new genes for totally new things. But the million dollar question is whether our race is ready for that.
Most societies, be it capitalistic or communist, are growing more authoritarian by the day.
That’s a problem with all kinds of eugenics. One might argue for positive eugenics, on the basis that it promotes good qualities of human genome. But as far as our science knows it, most smart-genes are associated with some or the other kind of psychologic / organic defects in the brain – autism and schizophrenia being the ends of a spectrum. Finding a balance in the gene bridge is the biggest problem.
When smartness becomes unlimited, the person becomes a total rebel defying all laws imposed by the society.. When artistic areas of the brain are genetically pushed to its limits, the person experiences regression of the other areas which may even tend towards autism..!! (the autistic idiot savant syndrome is the best example of this kind).
If we promote negative eugenics, by not permitting” diseased” genes from reproducing, that will be an encroachment into the very nature of our life on this planet. But its a re surging concept now. Most genetic screenings are in one or the other way, negative eugenics. Its only a matter of time before the “criminals” in jails will be banned from reproducing…!!
Are you saying that we have to go against evolution?
Yes..!
I was exactly trying to say we have to go against evolution in this matter….!
Or else, this race won’t last another millennium…that’s for sure.
Why, because, its the unique ability of the hominids to manipulate nature to meet his needs rather than letting nature manipulate him.
Thats simply what we have been doing ever since we branched out from the primate ancestors…Just look around and we will see only those things that man has built, invented or designed, to suit his needs, to help alleviate his toil, to ease his life, to bring out the maximum of his potential…!
Our hospitals defy the very basics of natural selection by differential extinction,
Our prenatal checkups do the same
Our geriatric centers do the same
Our schools do the same
Our railway, airlines, banks, bridges and roads, our space stations, satellites, rockets, hydel power stations, nuclear reactors….you name it…Everything helps man in one way or the other in defying Nature’s forces, and saving him from being deselected..!
So why don’t we extend this privilege to all classes of people in every population..?
Bravo!
I cannot find an expression enough to congratulate you on your thoughts. As excellent study in deed.
At first sight someone may feel that your example “The modern Mr. Z” is convincing. But, remember, you are conidering case of a person who is intelligent more than average. The person who has such extra ordinary skillset will still be able to pass his genes to next generation without reservation in present situation. To find the impact of reservation on society you should take the case of an average scholar.
I would like to draw your attention to the case of normal population. Consider the races X and Y. X’s average IQ is 90 and Y’s average IQ is 100. Imagine a job say ‘Software Engineer’ where all prefers partners who has the same job (just for ease of calculation) . Because of reservation 50 people from X and 50 people from Y are getting job there.
(Otherwise it should be 20 from X(IQ average 105) and 70 from Y (IQ average 105)).
In this case 50 people from Y who has average IQ of 95-98 are not able to pass their genes to next generation effectively.
And in other side, eventhough they had only average IQ of 90-92, 50 from X are able to pass their genes to next generation.
So in my opinion, You should think reservation as ‘man-made negative selection’.
Dear Kuthiravattan Ji,
1. You said >> “… But, remember, you are conidering case of a person who is intelligent more than average. The person who has such extra ordinary skillset will still be able to pass his genes to next generation without reservation in present situation ….”
” In the Present situation ” is the key phrase here. That’s the point i was trying to drive home all this while.
See these words friom my post : “..consider the same situation in a modern liberal…society …”
How did this “present situation” arise ?
The liberal nature of the society is what we need to nurture any kind of smartness genes, whether it be one that confers extra-ordinary mental abilities or average intelligence.
The pattern of inheritance is NOT influenced by the phenotype associated with the genes, which means, there’s no difference between inheritance of ’smart’ genes or inheritance of ‘average-IQ’ genes or inheritance of ‘dull genes’.
All kinds of affirmative actions and measures for social upliftment finally boils down to one single thing : the maximal expression of a gene’s potency.
The greatest evidence for this “Nature via Nurture” concept comes from the finding that the average height of human children has gone up over generations. This is NOT because, humans have evolved new genes for taller statures, its beacuse the nutrition of our children has become better on an average over all these generations. Better nutrition translates into better expression of the genes for height. This is a perfect example of how environmental stimulation and support can result in maximal expression of a gene’s potency.
2. As for your second argument, i didn’t exactly get that point, especially how you calculated the average IQs as 105. I wish you’d clarify that before i could comment on it.
regards.
1.
“The liberal nature of the society is what we need to nurture any kind of smartness genes”
It is already there, at least in kerala.
“All kinds of affirmative actions and measures for social upliftment finally boils down to one single thing : the maximal expression of a gene’s potency. ”
Giving better environment will help expression of the genes for height, and the same is applicable to intelligence. Agreed.
But reservation is against “avasara samathwam”. What it does is clear ‘racial discrimination’ – denying a person something based on his race. How would you justify this? Eugenics without ethics? Very dangerous. If we are willing to forget ethics, there will be faster ways.
2. In the example, by IQ I mean just one favourable quality, nothing more.
I have uploaded a graph in the below link.
http://picasaweb.google.com/kuthiravattan/Temp/photo#5166611279352491986
The average IQ of selected people will be around 105 if no reservation is there.
3.There are more flaws in your idea.
3.1. There is a chance for everybody to go for the trend, i.e try to learn the same skillsets. This will make some to loose the qualities that they aquired in 3000 years of evolution without their knowledge, like stamina, resistance power, agility, etc.
3.2. Do you remember what happened to vechoor cow? After a time, will we start a project something like ‘Vechoor Cow Conservation Project’?
3.3.This is against natural way of evolution.
3.4. The progam is designed by politicians to earn votes and rule for next 5 years. They never had a plan when to stop reservation. By the way, what is your best guess? when we can stop reservation? If you think present reservation system is good, you should be able to answer this question.
3.5. If you dont have a correct answer, decide when we need to stop reservation and has to be planned accordingly.
Dear Kuthiravattan,
(in the following reply, i ‘ve changed the order of the points just for the sequence of the arguments.)
1. ” Because of reservation 50 people from X and 50 people from Y are getting job there.(Otherwise it should be 20 from X(IQ average 105) and 70 from Y (IQ average 105)).
In this case 50 people from Y who has average IQ of 95-98 are not able to pass their genes to next generation effectively. And in other side, eventhough they had only average IQ of 90-92, 50 from X are able to pass their genes to next generation. “
Ok, there are problems to be addressed at the very outset when considering the argument based on IQ.
a. IQ or any of its subtype isn’t an attribute of a single gene but a collection of possibly 20 or 30 genes interacting at various levels which we haven’t decifered yet.
b. There is no particular gene for software intelligence or music intelligence or sports intelligence in a literal sense. Such expressions (for example the “smartness” genes i used in the write-up) are just a simplification meant to represent some survival qualities in humans.
c. Inheritance pattern of IQ is not known but all we can say for sure about that is it is multifactorial.
d. The IQ of the father as well as the mother needs to be taken into account when considering the IQs of the progeny. And in doing so, NEVER assume that the child’s IQ is going to be the average of the parents’ IQs, NOR is it correct to assume that the IQ will be same as that of one of the parents.
e. Reservation doesn’t prevent any particular community from procreation. The 50 people from race Y cannot be said to have been “prevented” from passing on their smartness genes just beacuse they were denied job opportunities in sofware field.
As per my point, the assumption to be made is that Race-Y has already accumulated enough smartness genes over generations of prosperity, which means their superior qualities can earn them better livelihood in present social circumstances.
That means, reservation is just accomodating the weaker sections into this social set up.
2. “But reservation is against “avasara samathwam”. What it does is clear ‘racial discrimination’ – denying a person something based on his race. How would you justify this? ”
The answer is in the write-up itself.
Here’s what i have written about a TRULY MERITOCRATIC SOCIETY :
” The whole meaning of reservation, scholarships and grants is to promote the maximal expression of the good genes in these oppressed castes and sects. For that, first of all, there should be some potentially smart genes that can be worked upon to be fully expressible. This means, we can’t expect the whole of those backward castes to ascend to an equal stance with the rest of the society within a very short period of time, simply from affirmative actions.
Affirmative actions should essentially be followed by two things if it’s to yield rapid results:
# 1) Positive change in social psyche, in accepting them and acknowledging their contributions.
# 2) General increase in equality and opportunities for all.
That’s when we can claim that the society has become truly meritocratic. ”
The situation in Kerala is far better when compared to the rest of India.
But still then there has to be a general increase in opportunities for all. For that, there has to be an increase in the diversity of jobs available in the society. In a society where everyone wants to be an software engineer or a doctor or a teacher, a lot of genetic qualities (or in other words, a lot of genes themselves) are actually never nurtured. The end result is a monotonous society with very little genetic variations, at least regarding subtypes of intelligence, in the long run.
3. Here are the comments on the “flaws” you pointed out in point # 3
3.1. ” There is a chance for everybody to go for the trend, i.e try to learn the same skill sets. This will make some to loose the qualities that they acquired in 3000 years of evolution without their knowledge, like stamina, resistance power, agility, etc.”
This has been answered in the previous point, i guess. Firstly, ‘Reservation’ is not for a few selected “skill sets”. For example, reservation in a basic educational institution (not a professional college) aims at helping the socially, and may be evolutionarily disadvantaged, groups among the population to compete with the already advantaged sects. There is no emphasis on any particular skill here.
And even in a professional college, we admit students based on what skills they have already accumulated from their pre-university education. There is no compulsion from the part of any one to join this or that profession, with regard to reservation.
And as i said earlier, if there is enough diversity of jobs or skills promoted in the society at large, then we need not worry about people evolcing monotonous skills. And that kind of diversity should encompass all populations, not just the sects with reservation, but the non-reservation castes too.
3.2. ” Do you remember what happened to vechoor cow? After a time, will we start a project something like ‘Vechoor Cow Conservation Project’? ”
Well, we in Kerala won’t start something like Vechoor Cow Conservation Project, but every sensible civilisation on earth now has learned ways to protect and conserve such bio diversities. If not the Mountain Guerillas, the Cheetah, and quite a lot of our flora and fauna would have been history by now. (This is just about animals, we have examples from human civilisations too)
3.3. “This is against natural way of evolution. “
Yes. Thats what i have been talking about in the latter half of the write-up.
Here’s what i wrote :
“…If you look deeper, you will see the reason.
With the general improvement in intelligence, human societies progressively have (and will) become altruistic. It’s the selfish gene’s covert strategy to promote the survival of its own kind.
Our hospitals, medical equipments, diagnostic gadgetry, ever expanding array of drugs, humanitarian organizations, peace organizations, trade partnerships etc are towering examples of this altruism and a blatant defiance of Natural Selection…”
If you say reservation is against natural selection, then you have to agree that treating people for even a pneumonia or heart attack is an act against natural selection : because here too, we are preventing the nature from exterminating the “unfit”.
As far as my point is concerned, when you save every single life on this planet with modern medical gadgetry or expertise, you are acting against nature, thus preventing the natural elimination of an unfit individual !
It doesn’t just end with a medical example. Ponder over these :
The woollen cloth that protects you from a harsh winter wasn’t woven by you. You don’t know how to shave a sheep, how to spin yarn or how to make a sweater. Still you are protected from nature by an artificial method. The building you stay in was not built by you, though you may have spent the money to build it. You didn’t bake the bricks, you didn’t mix the concrete, you didn’t prepare the blueprint of the plan.
Man is the only living being on earth that has the capability to alter its environment according to its life, thereby adapting nature to his needs, while every other creature from virus to the blue whale tries to adapt itself to its eco system.
All i say is, why don’t we extend this defiance of natural selection to the disadvantaged lot among us ?
3.4 ” when to stop reservation. By the way, what is your best guess? when we can stop reservation?”
Let me ask a counter question : “How do we forecast next week’s weather ? ”
You cant expect any one to say a single worded answer for that. Because weather is something that is influenced by a million small physical factors, of which at least a hundred or so needs to be measured precisely to predict next week’s weather to some extent of confidance.
My answer to your question therefore will be :
“When the society becomes truly meritocratic.”
If you are looking for a more precise answer, i guess, i’d say :
“When the backward communities have a population-proportionate representation in social and economic institutions, even without reservation.
(For example, the Christian community in Kerala has grown out of their backwardness and now has a represenation proportionate to their population in most educational or socio-economic sectors even in the merit quota)
But this is a vague guess. We need to evolve precise indices for that.
[i]// ” when to stop reservation. By the way, what is your best guess? when we can stop reservation?” //[/i]
when as a society, we become mature enough to stop thinking on the lines of caste, religion, gender or any discriminating factor.
seems like that’s a long way to go…for our society
Hi! I was surfing and found your blog post… nice! I love your blog.
Cheers! Sandra. R.
Sign: efrcm Hello!!! vzyar and 3956spdgenrkap and 74 : Sorry, what did you mean?? A??