"TopBassDog" wrote in message
...
On Jul 30, 6:15 pm, Harry  wrote:
From Science Daily:

Liberals and Atheists Smarter? Intelligent People Have Values Novel in
Human Evolutionary History, Study Finds

ScienceDaily (Feb. 24, 2010) — More intelligent people are statistically
significantly more likely to exhibit social values and religious and
political preferences that are novel to the human species in
evolutionary history. Specifically, liberalism and atheism, and for men
(but not women), preference for sexual exclusivity correlate with higher
intelligence, a new study finds.

The study, published in the March 2010 issue of the peer-reviewed
scientific journal Social Psychology Quarterly, advances a new theory to
explain why people form particular preferences and values. The theory
suggests that more intelligent people are more likely than less
intelligent people to adopt evolutionarily novel preferences and values,
but intelligence does not correlate with preferences and values that are
old enough to have been shaped by evolution over millions of years."

"Evolutionarily novel" preferences and values are those that humans are
not biologically designed to have and our ancestors probably did not
possess. In contrast, those that our ancestors had for millions of
years are "evolutionarily familiar."

"General intelligence, the ability to think and reason, endowed our
ancestors with advantages in solving evolutionarily novel problems for
which they did not have innate solutions," says Satoshi Kanazawa, an
evolutionary psychologist at the London School of Economics and
Political Science. "As a result, more intelligent people are more
likely to recognize and understand such novel entities and situations
than less intelligent people, and some of these entities and situations
are preferences, values, and lifestyles."

An earlier study by Kanazawa found that more intelligent individuals
were more nocturnal, waking up and staying up later than less
intelligent individuals. Because our ancestors lacked artificial light,
they tended to wake up shortly before dawn and go to sleep shortly after
dusk. Being nocturnal is evolutionarily novel.

In the current study, Kanazawa argues that humans are evolutionarily
designed to be conservative, caring mostly about their family and
friends, and being liberal, caring about an indefinite number of
genetically unrelated strangers they never meet or interact with, is
evolutionarily novel. **So more intelligent children may be more likely
to grow up to be liberals.**

Data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (Add
Health) support Kanazawa's hypothesis. Young adults who subjectively
identify themselves as "very liberal" have an average IQ of 106 during
adolescence while those who identify themselves as "very conservative"
have an average IQ of 95 during adolescence.

Similarly, religion is a byproduct of humans' tendency to perceive
agency and intention as causes of events, to see "the hands of God" at
work behind otherwise natural phenomena. "Humans are evolutionarily
designed to be paranoid, and they believe in God because they are
paranoid," says Kanazawa. This innate bias toward paranoia served
humans well when self-preservation and protection of their families and
clans depended on extreme vigilance to all potential dangers. "So, more
intelligent children are more likely to grow up to go against their
natural evolutionary tendency to believe in God, and they become
atheists."

Young adults who identify themselves as "not at all religious" have an
average IQ of 103 during adolescence, while those who identify
themselves as "very religious" have an average IQ of 97 during
adolescence.

In addition, humans have always been mildly polygynous in evolutionary
history. Men in polygynous marriages were not expected to be sexually
exclusive to one mate, whereas men in monogamous marriages were. In
sharp contrast, whether they are in a monogamous or polygynous marriage,
women were always expected to be sexually exclusive to one mate. So
being sexually exclusive is evolutionarily novel for men, but not for
women. And the theory predicts that more intelligent men are more
likely to value sexual exclusivity than less intelligent men, but
general intelligence makes no difference for women's value on sexual
exclusivity. Kanazawa's analysis of Add Health data supports these
sex-specific predictions as well.

One intriguing but theoretically predicted finding of the study is that
more intelligent people are no more or no less likely to value such
evolutionarily familiar entities as marriage, family, children, and
friends.

"Smater?" Herr Krause?

Like D'Plume, you are a "smat" liberal

From the Urban Dictionary:

Smat

1. A word replacing any word you please. 2. A word to replace any part
of a word you please. 3. Smart, with a typo. Therefore, stupid. 4. A
sound like "splat"

In this, as in most, the third thought seems to apply.

So, your typos are ok, but someone else's nyet!