Are people thicker these days?

[Kinkladze 1]

And probably never been to the dentist

Yeah mate! Ha ha. Her email address was mrslancetfluke funnily enough. Their kids teeth are going to be minting. It's disgraceful actually. I don't know why they just don't take them. It's tight.

 

[Damocles]

No. People are getting smarter. The Flynn Effect:-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn_effect

Enjoyed the thread though; on a par with the letter's page from Viz.

The Flynn Effect only shows that people are getting better at taking IQ tests.

I watch a channel on Youtube that features different physics professors, and on one of them they compared the maths exam from the 1970s to the exam from today and the difference was absolutely shocking. He had been a teacher for many years and had a major problem that new physics students just don't have a solid mathematical ground. I'd agree with this anecdotally too - learning the maths involved in my physics education was by far the most difficult aspect of the course and not one I grasped willingly.

The general idea in physics education (and this really does seem to be a wide ranging thing) is that GCSE and A levels give a broad scope of introduction to many different concepts but not in enough detail to actually teach them anything about them due to the relatively short time those courses take.

More here:

 

[andyhinch]

The Flynn Effect only shows that people are getting better at taking IQ tests.

I watch a channel on Youtube that features different physics professors, and on one of them they compared the maths exam from the 1970s to the exam from today and the difference was absolutely shocking. He had been a teacher for many years and had a major problem that new physics students just don't have a solid mathematical ground. I'd agree with this anecdotally too - learning the maths involved in my physics education was by far the most difficult aspect of the course and not one I grasped willingly.

The general idea in physics education (and this really does seem to be a wide ranging thing) is that GCSE and A levels give a broad scope of introduction to many different concepts but not in enough detail to actually teach them anything about them due to the relatively short time those courses take.

More here:

My understanding on this and I could well be wrong, is students aren't taught to solve equations from first principles anymore, I'm not sure how you can fully understand something if your knowledge is basically limited to knowing the correct formulae to apply.

 

[MellowJoe]

'We will embarrass our descendants just as our ancestors embarrass us.'
Idiocracy is looming I guess, but there is no excuse really. We should only be smarter than the previous generation, if education is working. Knowledge being passed on/built upon. I think it will be seen as a huge failure in years to come (if they come) .. the fact that the smartest people couldn't make the rest see the importance of understanding the game you're playing.

 

[2bluegp]

yarp

 

[GortonBlue62]

The Flynn Effect only shows that people are getting better at taking IQ tests.

I watch a channel on Youtube that features different physics professors, and on one of them they compared the maths exam from the 1970s to the exam from today and the difference was absolutely shocking. He had been a teacher for many years and had a major problem that new physics students just don't have a solid mathematical ground. I'd agree with this anecdotally too - learning the maths involved in my physics education was by far the most difficult aspect of the course and not one I grasped willingly.

The general idea in physics education (and this really does seem to be a wide ranging thing) is that GCSE and A levels give a broad scope of introduction to many different concepts but not in enough detail to actually teach them anything about them due to the relatively short time those courses take.

More here:

I accept that IQ tests are a very narrow measure of intelligence and caution should be taken extrapolating to general intelligence in the general population. The Flynn effect isn't saying that the average person in 2017 is a genius compared to his early 20th century counterpart. But something is going on. If I understand it correctly it seems we are far better at understanding abstraction thanks to the amount of scientific data we routinely take on board; weather forecasts; medical reports on GJ's metatarsal; compound interest; economic data (did we all understand the difference between fiscal policy and monetary policy before the Euro debate?); and on and on. Things we take for granted our grand parents would have struggled with.

You shouldn't confuse intelligence and education; there are lots of intelligent uneducated people and a plenty of graduates who aren't all that bright. The fact that the education system has been dumbed down (by successive governments from the left and the right) is a separate topic. I recently got bitten by a pure maths bug (wish it had happened in my 20's not my 50's) and in tackling degree level maths courses I'm amazed how much was covered in my Maths O level in 1977. Take calculus as an example, I've not encountered anything yet that is unfamiliar from my O level. I believe these days that on some Maths A level courses calculus isn't even covered, it's left to University study.

Back on topic and turning the question around; why would people be dumber now? We're living (in developed countries) in a time of unprecedented peace and wealth, it's been over 70 years since the second world war ended (historians call this period in our history 'the long peace'). I believe that the only limit to what a person can achieve in a country like ours is set by themselves. Compared to the environment our grand parents grew up, we're living in the promised land.

Why wouldn't our children's generation be smarter than us? That's the way of the world. And anyway they have had good teachers (as did we).

 

[GortonBlue62]

'We will embarrass our descendants just as our ancestors embarrass us.'
Idiocracy is looming I guess, but there is no excuse really. We should only be smarter than the previous generation, if education is working. Knowledge being passed on/built upon. I think it will be seen as a huge failure in years to come (if they come) .. the fact that the smartest people couldn't make the rest see the importance of understanding the game you're playing.

I wonder if the person in the quote would have been embarrassed by Shakespeare, Archimedes, Gauss, Euler, Newton, Darwin, etc? (That list could go on for a very long time.)

You over-estimate the value of education. But if we take your point you must concede that adult literacy is at an all time high and that everyone in this country qualifies for a pretty decent education (whether they want it or not).

Knowledge and intelligence are two separate, but closely related, concepts. Knowledge is 'possession of the facts'. Intelligence is the ability to do something with those facts. For the vast majority of jobs in our modern technological society you can get by with knowledge. If you want to join the list in the first paragraph you will need knowledge, intelligence, diligence and (more than a little) luck.

I'm optimistic about the future. Human nature doesn't change that much in short time periods and I think the generation to come will contain the same percentage of knob-heads and wise men (and women) as the ones that precede us.

 

[MellowJoe]

I wonder if the person in the quote would have been embarrassed by Shakespeare, Archimedes, Gauss, Euler, Newton, Darwin, etc? (That list could go on for a very long time.)

You over-estimate the value of education. But if we take your point you must concede that adult literacy is at an all time high and that everyone in this country qualifies for a pretty decent education (whether they want it or not).

Knowledge and intelligence are two separate, but closely related, concepts. Knowledge is 'possession of the facts'. Intelligence is the ability to do something with those facts. For the vast majority of jobs in our modern technological society you can get by with knowledge. If you want to join the list in the first paragraph you will need knowledge, intelligence, diligence and (more than a little) luck.

I'm optimistic about the future. Human nature doesn't change that much in short time periods and I think the generation to come will contain the same percentage of knob-heads and wise men (and women) as the ones that precede us.

I agree with all that virtually. The quote was Sam Harris' I think. I think the quote is solid. We are horrified by our past understanding of the world and how to live in it.. and likely the kids of 2100 will feel similarly about us. IQ is virtually meaningless, intelligence is the game, i agree. I should have used the word intelligence instead of knowledge.

 

[Mozzer]

yarp

Ha Ha!

 

[ChicagoBlue]

Excellent video. I would be interested to see what he thinks about the American system, which I think is pretty dire until you reach Graduate level education.

Four years of undergrad, 1.5-2.0 of which are "general education prerequisites to make sure you have a basic understanding of broad concepts of what an educated person should know, plus electives to further broaden your education!" Complete waste, which takes away from the time and ability to get a really im depth study of the major area of study, be it physics or anything else.

At Graduate level, you actually start to seriously get in depth, write educational research papers, and do presentations of material for peer discussion and review.