This is a commonly-repeated point which I have seen no evidence for. Specifically, I am aware of no evidence that propensity to believe in religion is passed on as a hereditary trait. Indeed, there are many human behaviours that would seem to be highly selected against in evolutionary terms but still persist to a high degree in the population (homosexuality, etc.) The reason of course is that these behaviours have a strong developmental component that is independent of genetics.
Also, homosexuality is 35-40% hereditary. There have been twin studies done. This is plausible, if for instance its caused by recessive genes which confer a homozygote fitness boost.
The key to securing the future success of a society lies less in getting ‘smart’ people to breed
Intelligence isn’t orthogonal to religiosity, and I didn’t propose any sort of eugenics.
and more in providing a good and intellectually stimulating environment for future children to grow up in.
Why do you believe this? All the evidence I’ve seen is that intelligence is mostly genetic, and providing an intellectually stimulating environment (beyond normal schooling, I suppose) will have very little effect.
I’m not necessarily disagreeing with you; I know that homosexuality is somewhat influenced by genetics. Which is why I said it has a strong developmental component. It is not 100% genetic, like eye color or skin color.
All of this said, twin studies are highly unreliable and I don’t recommend them as hard and fast evidence.
Why do you believe this? All the evidence I’ve seen is that intelligence is mostly genetic, and providing an intellectually stimulating environment (beyond normal schooling, I suppose) will have very little effect.
I’m not talking in terms of raw intelligence potential per se. I’m talking about how that intelligence is used. I’m sure that “medieval theocracies” had plenty of smart people, in fact they were almost definitely just as smart, in raw intelligence terms, as people are today. This is why I’m saying the key to a successful society lies in providing a good cultural environment for children to grow up in.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religiosity#Genes_and_environment
http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2013-08/what-twins-reveal-about-god-gene
Also, homosexuality is 35-40% hereditary. There have been twin studies done. This is plausible, if for instance its caused by recessive genes which confer a homozygote fitness boost.
Intelligence isn’t orthogonal to religiosity, and I didn’t propose any sort of eugenics.
Why do you believe this? All the evidence I’ve seen is that intelligence is mostly genetic, and providing an intellectually stimulating environment (beyond normal schooling, I suppose) will have very little effect.
http://www.medicaldaily.com/intelligence-and-iq-scores-children-are-not-influenced-parenting-style-good-or-bad-313588
I’m not necessarily disagreeing with you; I know that homosexuality is somewhat influenced by genetics. Which is why I said it has a strong developmental component. It is not 100% genetic, like eye color or skin color.
All of this said, twin studies are highly unreliable and I don’t recommend them as hard and fast evidence.
I’m not talking in terms of raw intelligence potential per se. I’m talking about how that intelligence is used. I’m sure that “medieval theocracies” had plenty of smart people, in fact they were almost definitely just as smart, in raw intelligence terms, as people are today. This is why I’m saying the key to a successful society lies in providing a good cultural environment for children to grow up in.