[thaumaturgy]

Idiocracy isn't exactly based on fact. (It's an OK movie though.) For one thing, there's no evidence, that I know of, that supports the claim that only "smart" parents have smart children, or that smart parents don't have dumb children, or that dumb parents don't have smart children, and so on.

Although genetics likely plays some role in "natural" intelligence, it's far from a simple hereditary relationship, and there's increasing evidence that the bulk of natural intelligence is actually the result of environmental factors during early child development.

[yummyfajitas]

...that supports the claim that only "smart" parents have smart children, or that smart parents don't have dumb children, or that dumb parents don't have smart children, and so on.

That would be a silly claim to make. A more plausible claim, and one which is well supported by the evidence, is that smart parents are considerably more likely to have smart children than dumb parents.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritability_of_IQ

[pohl]

Did the movie really contain genetic claims? I took the sequence at the beginning to be more a criticism of Cleavon's cultural traits. (example: "I thought you was on the pill or some shit!") In fact, most of the movie's humor centered around a downward cultural slide. Kids do pick up their parents memes more readily, after all.

[thaumaturgy]

Yes. IIRC, the "opening bit" that camiller was referencing above was about how intelligent people were continually having fewer children while less intelligent people bred as quickly as they could.

(ninja edit: here ya go: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PSROlfR7WTo)

[pohl]

Ok, but isn't that difference in birthdate orthogonal to whether the "intelligence" is a result of nature or nurture? (Don't forget that when you have children you're not just propagating genes, but memes as well. Kids raised on Jersey Shore will tune in to Ow, My Balls!)

I don't recall the movie taking a stance towards nature. In fact, the moral of the whole story is to try to solve problems, and the great speech at the end envisioned a time where people cared whose ass it was and why it was farting. These are messages about cultural priorities, not genetic limitations.

[thaumaturgy]

> Don't forget that when you have children you're not just propagating genes, but memes as well. Kids raised on Jersey Shore will tune in to Ow, My Balls!

...right, which would make it irrelevant whether high-IQ parents are having kids or not (they can still work as educators, scientists, leaders -- much the same situation as now), which in turn would make that opening scene of the movie a non-sequitur.

> These are messages about cultural priorities, not genetic limitations.

Yes, but they are also the only feasible remaining strategy left given the resources at hand at the end. IIRC, the lead character was tested as having the highest recorded IQ in the world, so it's not like his strategy for solving problems could be "go find high IQ couples and mate them in a high-IQ zoo".

Maybe I'm wrong. I only watched it once, back at a time when I thought the world was doomed and the movie was prophetic (so I didn't really pay close attention). OTOH, a quick search online finds that I'm not the only one that interpreted it this way, so at the least it was less clear than it could have been on this point.

[pohl]

(they can still work as educators, scientists, leaders -- much the same situation as now)

I don't think working as an educator or leader, in the movie's world, would make any difference. They would be, after all, attempting to educate or lead people who equate speaking in grammatical, semantically precise sentences with "talking like a fag". (see Dr. Lexus, etc.)

As for Scientists, they were consumed with solving the problems of hair loss and prolonging erections.

[pkulak]

It sounds like you misunderstand how evolution works.