Although my proficiencies are in the fields of medicinal chemistry, biochemistry, pharmacology etc, I can safely conclude that you do not know what you are on about; and I doubt you have come across any professors to begin with.
Yes, I do know a lot of professors, and let me assure you that I have attended university to post graduate level.
Granted, genetic factors may have a part to play in an individuals overall intelligence, however to suggest that an individuals genes are a predominant factor is erroneous.
The type of parenting, level of education, external environment, socio-economic factors, socio-political factors to name but a few all play a determinational role in an individuals intelligence that could render any genetic factor as void or negligible.
Given adequate nutrition, genes are the only factor that determines a person's intelligence.
Obviously, a malnourished child will not develop to his potential, and thus end up with a low-IQ, but his intelligence will not exceed the pre-determined limit imposed by his own genes.
"Measures of intelligence have reliable statistical relationships with important social phenomena, but they are a limited tool for deciding what to make of any given individual. Repeat it we must, for one of the problems of writing about intelligence is how to remind readers often enough how little an IQ score tells you about whether the human being next to you is someone whom you will admire or cherish." Herrnstein and Murray (1994, p. 21)
I can quote many more papers that conclude the exact opposite. However, quoting one para from a paper which gives no details about the testing conditions, the test participants, the country in which the test was conducted, etc. etc. cannot be used to prove anything.
"Mother Nature has plainly not entrusted the determination of our intellectual capacities to the blind fate of a gene or genes; she gave us parents, learning, language, culture and education to program ourselves with."
(Ridley, 1999, p. 77)
Obviously, without education, nobody will able to achieve his or her intellectual capacity. Your para is nothing but a red herring.
As far a parenting goes, bad parenting can spoil a person's attitude and personality, but not intelligence.
By your own reckoning, Salman sahib, you must give yourself up for castration post haste!
My IQ has been measure by several tests to be between 132 and 136, and no, I don't mean the internet crap tests where they make everyone feel like a genius.
Your views about preventing people from having children based upon their IQ is utterly abhorrent to any decent human being; especially if one considers that an IQ test is subjective and problematic to begin with.
Its abhorrent to you because you have judged based on your own subjective values and morality. Just like it was considered abhorrent for females to have sex outside marriage a century ago, but today it is perfectly acceptable in Scandinavian countries.
And again, IQ is NOT problematic if measured correctly, tailoring the test to the local situation.
Even if we agree for arguments sake that an IQ test is fit for purpose, have you considered the social affects of implementing your Nazi-like scheme?
We will have two classes of people those who can and those who cannot have children. Those who can have children will feel naturally empowered and will develop Nazi-like traits, whereas those who cannot will become the despised and rejected of society. Seen as it established the intelligence is not a predominantly genetic trait, the cycle will continue to ad infinitum
Nazi like...Nazi like...more character assassination and less logic.
Just like those who can afford cars feel naturally empowered? Or those who own expensive shoes feel empowered ? Or those who hold high positions in big compaines feel empowered?
Are sweepers rejected and despised in your society because they are not talented enough to be Stephen Hawking? Or are you suggesting that everyone is capable enough to be Stephen Hawking and its the fault of their parents and their schools that they're not?
Power will always be distributed unequally, and talented people will naturally get more power. That is only considered "Nazi-like" if you label it that way.
Does an IQ test determine the goodness of an individual? Is your lower class of ultra stupid human being to be judged as worthless due to intelligence alone with a total disregard of them being good people?
There is nothing called "goodness". Everyone inherits the values of their parents and their society as long as they have no mental illness that prevents them from doing so.
Of course, ones attitude is also shaped by genetic factors, but there is nothing to indicate that more intelligent people are "more evil" than people with average intelligence. So one can safely assume that a high-iq society wouldn't be any more "evil" than a low-iq one.
Infact, those with low-IQ are far more likely to get influenced by religious or fundamentalist propaganda into committing heinous crimes and other acts detrimental to the progress of society.
