Definition of Effective Survival Intelligence

Let me start with something I call Effective Survival Intelligence (ESI). I define ESI as the ability to understand and solve real problems by relying on:

(1) Intuition mechanisms [i.e., System 1, see Two Brains Running], i.e., hard-wired instincts and automatic intuition responses based on heuristics

(2) Reasoning mechanisms [i.e., System 2, see Two Brains Running], i.e., mathematical operations on plurality of data operands in the brain

where goals are to:

(3) minimize the action time

(4) minimize own energy and resources spent

(5) minimize own losses (material, health, etc.)

(6) maximize own gains (material, health, etc.)

A typical data operand taken as input to be processed in System 2 (basically corresponding to the cerebral cortex) is a belief. Belief is an acceptance that a statement/proposition is true or false. Propositions are constructed based on data available in the brain.

Modern psychology defines fluid intelligence (independent of acquired knowledge) and crystallized intelligence (dependent on acquired knowledge) [see fluid and crystallized intelligence]. Both definitions are based on general cognitive ability, i.e. person-specific hard-wired ability to learn.

Hence, in order to have good ESI performance, efficient performance of System 1 and System 2 is required. So, one needs to:

(7) be lucky enough to be born with as good cognitive ability as possible, and

(8) have as accurate data as possible about anything relevant

Reality check

(7) is out of control. Nobody can choose the level of intelligence they are born with.

However, (8) depends on us and the environment we live in. The crucial point is, the data stored in the brain can be considered more accurate if it is more based on scientific evidence and unbiased information sources.

The conclusion is:

Science-based education and unbiased information media are the key to establishing accurate data in a brain. This requires availability of quality educational system (both formal and informal) and unbiased media.

Now, several scenarios and hypotheses.

Society A:

Average education level = LOW; Biased media

ESI: Smart sociopaths/psychopaths have superior ESI performance (note: psychopaths make up 1-4% of the population). They exploit the vast majority of people because of the huge differences in efficiency of (2).

Consequences: Authoritarian/populist government, corrupted institutions, high unemployment, huge socio-economic differences, people struggle to survive and are inevitably more selfish and increasingly ignorant, thus morality is low, high intolerance, conflicts, aggressiveness, diseases, high mortality rate, high religiosity, pseudo-sciences flourish, most people suffer from anxiety, depression, etc.

In a recent scientific study titled as “Forbidden Fruits: The Political Economy of Science, Religion, and Growth”, a long-term societal system has been described that seems to match (at least partially) the Society A type. That system is defined as a ““Theocratic” regime with knowledge stagnation, extreme religiosity.”

Society B:

Average education level = HIGH; Variance of the education level = LOW; Unbiased media

ESI: no high variance. The differences in efficiency of (2) are not large within the society.

Consequences: The government and societal institutions work for the well-being of the people, low corruption, very low unemployment, robust and sustainable economy, socio-economic differences diminish, health care is good and available to all, people are happier, healthier, trust the system is fair, continuous investments in science and education, good welfare system, religiosity disappearing, etc.

With regard to the above referenced study, the authors describe a ““Western-European” regime” that resembles the Society B type in “declining religiosity, unimpeded scientific progress”.

Society C:

Average education level = MEDIUM; Variance of the education level = HIGH; Both biased and unbiased media exist

ESI: high variance. The differences in efficiency of (2) are large enough so that selfish, wealthy and powerful elites are well established and willing to exploit the least educated and misinformed.

Consequences: The system is democratic, however with fairly populist politics, medium corruption, unemployment may be low but fluctuating as well, generally strong but unstable economy, large socio-economic differences, classes are inevitable, huge diversity in well beings of people, high religiosity and high crime rates among poor citizens, health care not guaranteed, and so on.

Again, the above mentioned study (Forbidden Fruits: The Political Economy

of Science, Religion, and Growth) models a type of system resembling the Society C type . This system is described as an ““American regime”, which generally (not always) succeeds in combining unimpeded scientific progress and stable religiosity within a range where the state does not block new discoveries and the religious sector finds it worthwhile to invest in doctrinal repair and adaptation.” Also, it points out that “Inequality can thus be harmful to knowledge and growth, by inducing obscurantist, anti-science attitudes and polices.”

My general hypothesis

The average science-based education level, the variance of the science-based education level, the degree of unbiased journalism and the number of years/decades spent in a certain range of these parameters are the main predictors of the levels of prosperity, happiness and morality of a society. The scenarios above illustrate the various cases.

Thoughts and feedback are welcome. Thanks.

P.S. I have not figured out how to objectively measure the science-based education level of a person. Education can be both formal and informal.

P.P.S. In the next article, I will analyze different types of societies in more detail.