March 06 2008 / by Alvis
Category: Technology Year: General Rating: 6
The Flynn Effect is a
fascinating observation that average human IQ has been rising
steadily since the invention of tests that measure it. It’s
possible that it has been caused directly or indirectly by
increased access to information, technology and human networks. If
that’s the case, and the trend in human IQ is pegged to trends in
these areas, then it’s also possible that we’re about to get a heck
of a lot smarter in a very short span of time. Perhaps even
exponentially smarter.
Ray Kurzweil has
shown that technology is increasing at an exponential, or even
double-exponential rate. A
Berkeley 
study and a
report by IDC both have confirmed
that the amount of information on Earth is growing at an
exponential rate. It is clear that advances in communication
technology are facilitating an explosion in the rate of
communication between people, thus increasing the value of the
whole according to Metcalfe’s Network
Law .
It’s undeniable that these accelerating trends have had a
profound impact on social behavior, in particular our ability to
solve ever more complex problems. If you don’t believe me, simply
take a look at how quickly a person or a group can locate
information, bounce it off of others and output that as a rich
white paper, business strategy or more advanced technology—then
imagine how difficult that same task would have been minus the
internet, huge bodies of amassed knowledge and an environment chock
full of complex and inspirational solutions to diverse problem
sets.
Human brains are not closed systems. They are constantly
learning better ways to input, sort and output information
(ultimately this manifests as culture). In order to increase their
intelligence, they must encounter information, technology and
interact with other humans. It has been shown that children raised
sans society are beyond dysfunctional, and that humans who miss
critical periods for learning things as simple as counting from 1
to 10 or certain ways of looking at time
cannot regain those abilities once the developmental windows
close. This indicates that there is a strong relationship between
access to information + technology and human intelligence.
But just how strong is the link? Will humans get smarter faster
or is there a cut-off point after which technology and information
systems speed off into a phase place where we cannot follow?
Obviously, these are questions with far reaching consequences. The
answers will determine how we evolve, the likelihood of our
survival and/or expansion, whether AI or
IA is
the future, and if a singularity
is possible, impossible or desirable.
The more critical the human-tech-info symbiosis, the more likely
it is that the Flynn Effect will continue and translate into
exponential growth of our own intelligence parallel to these other
trends (auto-catalytically), rather than subsequently and as a
by-product of them.
Many would argue that it’s really just technology pulling along
a biological system, and that human intelligence is distinct from
that technology. But I’m not so sure that’s a true dichotomy nor
the most efficient way to characterize ourselves, our technology
and our system.
Other species like dolphins and apes have employed basic tools,
and it’s arguable that our current use of technology is
fundamentally natural rather than an outgrowth from nature. Also, I
have yet to hear a definition of human intelligence that does not
require the context of our system, which as I pointed out above is
responsible for catalyzing intelligence during critical
periods.
All of this translates into IQ tests that do an OK job
predicting general test smarts but still can’t predict how
successful a person will be in the system. According to this line
of reasoning, that’s due to the lack of appropriate systems context
and environment in which that person operates. Because if indeed
intelligence is pegged to tech and information, and we want to
cultivate more meaningful IQ scoring systems, then we should allow
humans access to info, tech, other people and the broader system
during those tests. Newer tests might measure for the total
efficiency of a given operation according to how little Matter,
Energy, Space, Time and Capital was required to perform it, thus
establishing a more robust estimation of problem solving ability.
(Kind of like the on-the-job analysis that the more serious
companies perform before hiring someone.)
Maybe humans are more distinct from our technology than I am
postulating here, but if they aren’t and we’re dancing a very tight
dance then just imagine how more accurate IQ scores based on
broader systems performance and interaction would line up over
time. The growth would be astounding, perhaps running parallel to
the exponential tech and info curves that have already been
plotted.
We’ll just have to live it to find out for certain.
Comment Thread ()
