r/education • u/seecstahl • 7d ago
Generational intelligence
The Flynn Effect shows IQ gains of 15+ points per generation with environmental improvement. That suggests capacity wasn't the constraint—activation was. If we take that seriously, what does it mean that some populations have been systematically denied the kind of cognitively demanding work and education that builds skill across generations? Isn't that a mechanism worth exploring?
6
7d ago edited 7d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/KartFacedThaoDien 7d ago
Where do you live where teachers make the decision for students to skip grades? That would mostly be a decision for parents, counselors & admin.
2
u/mayank716 6d ago
The Flynn Effect framing is interesting but I think the more immediate version of this is happening in real time with AI. We’re at a point where the bottleneck isn’t access to information — it’s access to the right cognitive environment to process it. A student in a rural area with a smartphone and ChatGPT now has a thinking partner that previous generations paid coaching institutes thousands for. Whether that translates to actual generational intelligence gains or just surface-level access is still an open question.
0
u/seecstahl 6d ago
Interesting! Can you explain more of what you mean? Are there adequate resources for demonstrating how to leverage AI to such end? How does one from a suppressed community gain the perspective to "access the cognitive environment to process [with thinking partner]"...?
2
u/stomachofchampions 7d ago
They have explored it. They are using it to create a large supply of cheap labor.
The job of the school is to make sure they can follow basic commands and don’t steal.
Then they can go work to serve the public. They will be advertised junk food and beer so they die before collecting social security and Medicare.
I assumed this was widely known.
4
u/harp011 7d ago
Well what’s interesting about the Flynn affect it’s that it’s been nearly really widespread across populations in the developed and developing world over several generations. Like from 1900-2010 every generation in basically every environment- except for discreet cases where things got really shitty for a period, i.e. Afghanistan- has seen their cognitive capacity increase
4
u/seecstahl 7d ago
Thanks! I'm not proposing new genetic theories. I'm asking: if we take seriously what we know about epigenetics, neuroplasticity, and stress biology, are there mechanisms by which systemic deprivation creates real biological costs that persist across generations—without requiring genetic differences? And if so, doesn't that actually strengthen the case for sustained intervention, not weaken it?
3
u/seecstahl 7d ago
That sounds like an unhelpful framing of school tracking and predatory marketing; those exist and worth examining, but framing them as deliberate conspiracy rather than emergent structural outcomes actually weakens the argument — it invites easy dismissal and distracts from the parts that are empirically grounded. Structural racism and neglect don't need a smoking-gun memo to be real or harmful; "nobody planned this centrally, but these outcomes were foreseeable and nothing was done to stop them" is actually a stronger and more defensible claim than "this was engineered."
2
u/stomachofchampions 7d ago
Kind of a distinction without a difference no?
They know this is happening and they intentionally don’t do anything to keep the supply of cheap labor large.
1
u/dawsonholloway1 7d ago
You act like oppression is merely a not thought about consequence to society's best intentions. I can assure you that it's not. Oppression is often the intention. Don't be naive.
1
u/seecstahl 7d ago
Relax, there are not excuses being made to let anyone off the hook, but we'd like to discuss the effects and how to move forward, without the blame games of the causes.
1
u/seecstahl 7d ago
To actually tap into your note, war and atrocities feed into the understandings we know that epigenetic changes can persist across generations and respond to environmental stress. What if centuries of systematic deprivation—malnutrition, chronic stress, educational exclusion, violence—created heritable epigenetic markers that persist even after conditions improve? And what if 'closing the gap' in one or two generations is biologically unrealistic without addressing the accumulated burden? This wouldn't be genetic inferiority; it would be systemic harm with biological costs.
1
u/devbent 7d ago edited 7d ago
Who is this "they"?
I've worked for mega corps. They spend millions trying to get advanced math and technology classes into schools. They want original thinkers who can develop brand new technologies, and they want to flood the market with smart new graduates to bring labor costs down.
Heck they'd pay employees their full salary to go volunteer and teach at schools and then pay the school more money on top of that.
(AI is their new current hope for that labor costs problem...)
Smart corporations want as much of the population earning as much $$ as possible at highly paid jobs because those people have more money to spend.
1
u/seecstahl 7d ago
True, and as I understand it, neuroplasticity shows that cognitive development requires environmental activation and challenge. What if populations denied access to education, skilled work, and intellectual engagement for centuries didn't just miss knowledge—but their brains, and their children's brains, developed differently in response to that deprivation? Not genetically 'less capable,' but developmentally shaped by exclusion. Could intergenerational cognitive recovery require more than just access—actual intervention to rebuild pathways?
1
u/cherry-care-bear 6d ago
Two questions; what forms would these interventions take and why would some of the same consistent players who caused these systemic issues over time choose to fund solutions? Because god knows the victims can't pay but seem best at producing more victims.
1
u/seecstahl 5d ago
I think you're falling into the same traps to maintain the status quo... I'm nowhere close to suggesting policy changes, but nudging the curiosity for scientific understanding toward a better mental basis than the classic money and power struggles. I don't even like the "victimization" tropes you're touching on... I think it requires a grander perspective on humanity and potential and what a thriving society could be. 🫂
1
1
u/DrummerBusiness3434 7d ago
Yes, My teaching experience in working class communities, I witnessed a small group of students and parents (not ness in the same family) who were anti school. Some adults seem to be scarred by a problem they encountered when they were students and impressed that bitterness onto their child.
This is a very sensitive subject. I think colleges of education avoid or keep quiet as it can easily be thought of a a support of Eugenics. There does exist a notion that if you put smart kids in a class with more basic kids, there will be a rubbing-off affect, thus raising the skill level of the basic kids. I question this as it sounds like having poor people living next to rich people. And we know that does not rub off, making the poor people less poor.
1
u/seecstahl 6d ago
Yes, regarding the "sensitive subject" because the eugenics heuristics are the red herring that seems to prevent people from seeking to understand the scale of the abuse I am describing. That generations of oppression has caused biological harm to specific communities. "Reparations" carries equally (even more) charged sentiments, and the types that people's minds jump to are not what I would even be considering if the science supported vast intervention. I'm merely proposing shining light into the study of something that historical oppressors intentionally created, and I'd expect we're advancing into a society that is appalled by the prospect (rather than my proposal).
2
u/DrummerBusiness3434 6d ago
I am not saying it should not be a topic to research. I am saying that risk adverse college and schools of education already shy away from many topics, and this one is probably still one of those topics.
My pedagogical lost cause is that middle schools should employ curriculum which is based on the science which says the young adolescent has a very different brain function and is hard wired for social learning more then academics. This is not a popular stance, esp in today's world of "all kids must transition to college" zeitgeist.
1
u/cherry-care-bear 6d ago
I feel like the reason institutions shy away from these topics is because they seem predicated on what the smarter, wealthier, Etc., people need to be doing differently to account or compensate for whichever factors.
So the question IMO is how can those literally impacted be encouraged to function or respond differently toward the end of securing a better and more sustainable result?
2
u/Complete-Ad9574 6d ago
Yes very much so. Upper middle class and rich American parents want their middle schools to be Jr high schools with total focus on prep for high school and nothing about socialization. Its all about the pre-K-12 march to college entry.
1
u/DrummerBusiness3434 23h ago
So much screen time blunts real curiosity. It may not be classified as a drug, but its affect is the same and the addiction is the same. Many of my co-workers are addicted to their phones. That and chatting with each other. Seems that screen time makes staying on task impossible.
Historians have recounted when Europeans adopted hot tea & coffee as their main drinks, their production increased, as they were being stimulated and not dulled bu drinking beer or wine all day. I think cell phones have had the opposite affect.
0
u/mr_herz 7d ago
“some populations have been systematically denied the kind of cognitively demanding work and education that builds skill across generations”
We should probably also look at how the passive victimhood mindset affects IQ. Especially the view that some populations don’t seem to have the agency to develop themselves and it’s always some other populations responsibility to lift them up and keep them on par or something.
1
u/seecstahl 7d ago
Interesting, but isn't the claim that "it's always some other population's responsibility to lift them up" ignoring that beliefs about a group's agency and capability are themselves causally active, via stereotype threat and self-fulfilling prophecy research — I mean your stance is itself one of the mechanisms that can suppress performance in that population. So your comment toes being a live example, and not a counterargument 🫂
0
u/mr_herz 7d ago
I don’t believe or think it should be any other groups responsibility for lifting another. I was describing that comes with the mindset of compensation because they’re at a disadvantage.
My point is simply that as long as any group maintains a passive victimhood mindset, they deserve to remain in the prison they choose to stay in.
14
u/la_capitana 7d ago
I wonder how much technology/ screen time impacts that growth