As people of IQ less than 200, it’s difficult for us to imagine how a society might look if our species were magnitudes more intelligent than we are today. Our evolution has hard-wired us for survival and with that has come what psychologists call “ingroup-outgroup” cognitive bias. In The Descent of Man, Charles Darwin describes how a propensity for cooperation may have provided an advantage in inter-tribal contests for survival.
When two tribes of primeval man, living in the same country, came into competition, if (other circumstances being equal) the one tribe included a great number of courageous, sympathetic and faithful members, who were always ready to warn each other of danger, to aid and defend each other, this tribe would succeed better and conquer the other … The advantage which disciplined soldiers have over undisciplined hordes follows chiefly from the confidence which each man feels in his comrades. … Selfish and contentious people will not cohere and without coherence nothing can be effected. A tribe rich in the above qualities would spread and be victorious over other tribes.
Darwin explains that we have a great empathy for those we consider part of our group or tribe and a natural antipathy for those outside our group. This gave us a survival advantage when one tribe had to defeat another for land, food or resources. However, we are no longer disparate tribes and are part of a global community. The emotions that are part of our DNA may no longer serve our survival needs.
Our capacity for empathy and love, especially a mother’s love for her child, and our capacity for kindness and acts of selfless actions in acts of charity are the hallmark of our positive emotions. However, our ingroup-outgroup bias that carries disinterest or antipathy toward those outside our tribe, threatens our survival as a species. The question posed here is, “How would our world change if our intelligence were increased?”
Today, we are much more sophisticated in our knowledge and technology than we were 3000 years ago. We may be even more rational and less prone to superstition than we were in past. Yet, we continue to see this visceral component of the human psyche in the numerous wars that continue to plague our planet. As we’ve become more capable in a rational way, our weapons have become more sophisticated and more lethal, bringing our entire planet to the brink of destruction. Yet, we continue to march forward like warring ant colonies bent on the destruction of competing colonies.
If we were to evolve into a highly rational species like the one portrayed by Dr. Spock in Star Trek, would we be happier and less likely to self-destruct? No one knows, and we can only speculate. However, if we look at the current conflicts across the globe, we might conclude that our struggle may not result in survival of the fittest tribe, but rather, survival of the fittest species and the smart money is on the viruses and microbes.
