The long-term rise in IQ scores might be coming to a halt, but we should focus on improving social conditions rather than worrying about idiocracy

THE US Immigration Act of 1924 imposed limits on the number of people from a wide range of “undesirable” ethnicities who could move to the country. Some of the staunchest supporters of the act were eugenicists, who believed that the fecundity of poor people was reducing the overall health and intelligence of the nation. They wanted to stop “inferior stock” from Europe, including Italians, Czechs and Poles, further weakening the US’s superior “old stock”.

They were, of course, wrong. Poor performance by immigrants on IQ tests had nothing to do with ethnicity and everything to do with poverty. Malnutrition, poor health and lack of education all depress IQ. As social conditions have improved, IQ scores have shot up in country after country, in what is called the Flynn effect. In the US, they rose by 3 points per decade between 1932 and 1978.

But concerns about populations getting dumber persist. Idiocracy, a 2006 comedy film from Beavis and Butthead creator Mike Judge, takes the premise that natural selection pays little heed to intelligence. The result is a darkly funny future in which the stupid, having outbred the smart, now spend their days guzzling junk while gawping at utterly inane TV.

Idiocracy drew little comment on its initial release, but has become a touchstone among those who despair at what they see as relentless dumbing down of social and political discourse. “The comedy that’s becoming a documentary,” is the refrain.


Now we are starting to hear suggestions that there is science to back up Idiocracy’s premise. In some countries, the long rise in IQ scores has come to a halt, and there are even signs of a decline. The reason, according to a few researchers, is that improving social conditions have obscured an underlying decline in our genetic potential. Perhaps we are evolving to be stupid after all.

“In some countries, the long rise in IQ scores has come to a halt, and there are even signs of a decline”

Many people will find that idea unpalatable. They can, for the moment, take solace in the knowledge that the evidence for such a genetic decline is as yet weak. The apparent reversal of the Flynn effect in a handful of countries could well be a blip rather than the start of a global trend (see “Brain drain: Are we evolving stupidity?“).

But we should keep an open mind. It could turn out that the decline is real but has nothing to do with genetic changes. It could be a warning sign that junk food is beginning to affect children’s development, or that educational reforms are having the wrong effects. So we should keep an eye on trends in intelligence. In fact, it would be stupid not to.

But there remains the question of what we are measuring. IQ is one measure of intelligence, but it is not the only one. And people with high IQ scores can still believe and do things that are irrational and illogical – in a word, stupid (New Scientist, 30 March 2013, page 30). Nor are people with high IQs necessarily the most successful or socially productive. Other qualities, including “grit”, self-control and mindset, are vital too (8 March 2014, page 30).

Given the grim precedents for judging people by poorly formed ideas about intelligence and heredity, we need to be sure about what’s going on before jumping to take action. What is clear already is that success in life is due as much to privilege as to intellect, despite what some rich people might prefer to believe. So for now, at least, we would do better to focus on helping poor people to overcome their disadvantages than to worry about the prospect of idiocracy.

This article appeared in print under the headline “Dumber and dumber”