6.a) The Darwinout experiment
The Darwin-out experiment is a proposed study on the evolution of intelligence in order to verify empirically the Conditional Evolution.
The idea arose in 2011 due to the remarkable adjustment of the September 2002 additional hypothesis of sexual selection regarding the initial April 2002 EDI Study - Evolution and Design of Intelligence, which implied a great sensibility of the evolutionary model of intelligence, even for groups of 10 individuals. Of course, it is always interesting to search for a simpler, more definitive experiment.
To date, this new Darwin-out experiment is just a proposal, but it is viable thanks to the advances in biology and genetics. Moreover, the cost is not too high considering the conclusions if the results were positive.
The objective is to confirm the results of the EDI Study - Evolution and Design of Intelligence, regarding the security function carried out by women in the sexual differentiation, the genetic information update carried out by men, the genetic nature of intelligence and its 10% increment in each generation. The root of the Darwin-out experiment is the linear discriminant analysis of the origin of the maternal X chromosome.
Logically, the results of the EDI Study - Evolution and Design of Intelligence can be validated by repeating the study on a larger scale; however, this can also be done with a different experiment.
In particular, if we consider as hypothesis's the conclusions outlined in the EDI Study – Evolution and Design of Intelligence, and if we manage to compare intelligence between individuals with updated and not updated chromosomes that support intelligence, that is to say, with a generational gap we should obtain higher IQ for the former ones.
Of the two sexual chromosomes of an individual, one will always be updated, either X or Y, because it comes from the father. The other will not, as it is from the mother. Now, the grandfather could have updated the maternal X chromosome in the previous generation (XGF); or conversely the grandmother did not update it (XGM). We were searching for this characteristic of a generational gap in order to be able to discriminate in the evolution of intelligence.
Due to logic of evolutionary optimization, I would say that intelligence can be found in the sexual chromosomes. In any case, if that were not the case, the very Darwin-out experiment would allow us to find the chromosome responsible for the evolution of intelligence.
The new Darwinout experiment is exceptionally aseptic, as it does not incorporate per se any bias regarding the evolution of intelligence recognizable a priori. What’s more, if in the selection of the sample there were significant biases, it would not be a problem, as we will see.
The experiment consists of two phases.
Selection of a random sample
The first step would be to select a random sample of 100 women of a similar age, same race, middle social stratum, etc., in order to reduce any possible biases, either genetic or environmental in nature. Then, find out their IQ and the male or female source of the previous generation of the maternal X chromosome. That is to say, if it comes from the maternal grandfather (XGF) or the maternal grandmother (XGM.)
Of course, the larger the sample is the better. It is interesting to note that the intelligence test used will not influence the experiment results, from a gender perspective, whether it be balanced or not a priori, as the sample is composed of solely one gender.
Logically, if the sample is not significantly biased, approximately 50% of the maternal X chromosomes should come from the grandfather and the other 50% from the grandmother, according to the theory of Darwin and the laws of Mendel.
The hypothesis to verify is if the average IQ of the sample is above 100 then the proportion of XGF will be above 50%.
An interesting and biased sample would be 100 members of Mensa (an association of people with IQ over 98% of the population). However, I believe this particular sample should outstandingly verify the above hypothesis of the evolution of intelligence; I would say the proportion of XGF would be 70% or higher. Furthermore, the cost of the Darwin-out experiment would be smaller, as the IQ test would be redundant.
Elimination of possible significant biases
Perhaps the previous Darwin-out experiment would not verify the hypothesis due to biases in the statistical population or the selected sample.
In order to remove or balance theses biases in the initial population or in the selection of the sample we take XGF as an initial reference (XGF = 100 – XGM) and we rearrange the sample in accordance with their IQ.
The hypothesis to contrast now is that the group consisting of 50 women with lower IQ will have a lower proportion of XGF and higher of XGM than the whole sample.
Following the same reasoning, we could say that if we make four groups within the rearranged sample, the proportion of XGF should be greater the higher the IQ of the groups is.
Logically, if the hypotheses about the evolution of intelligence are correct and any possible biases are balanced out, there would be direct causality between more modern chromosomes and greater or more evolved intelligence.
If we divide the sample into two groups in the Darwinout experiment, one of the individuals with XGM and the other of the people with XGF, the average IQ of the first group should be smaller than that of the second.
Of course, the number of people of each group does not necessarily have to be exactly half the number of people in the sample.
Having confirmed the hypothesis with the previously mentioned elimination or balance of biases, the following extremes would be strengthened:
- Existence of evolution of intelligence in each generation
- Realization of improvements in the genetic information exclusively by males
- Localization of the elemental functions of intelligence in the sexual chromosomes X and Y or, at least, in one known chromosome.
- The non-randomness of all genetic modifications and, therefore, the incorrectness of the theory of Darwin
- Existence of a teleological intelligence different from the human one
The quantitative analysis of the Darwin-out experiment with a sufficiently large sample and several groups could allow us to check the coherence of the results regarding the 10% of human intelligence evolution in each generation detected in the EDI Study – Evolution and Design of Intelligence.
This exceptionally simple empiric research will offer its results without biases, without environmental interferences, without technical intrusions and without the need of a precise definition of intelligence. Moreover, to understand this experiment one does not need to have special academic degrees or to make a large effort.
A male sample would also do!
As we can see in the explanation of Darwin-out experiment, the analysis with male, female or mixed intelligence would be identical, scheming the source of the only maternal X chromosome, be it from the grandfather o the grandmother.
It is relevant to note that the objective of the Darwinout experiment is not to deny or explain the possible differences between male and female intelligence; but to strengthen scientifically the Conditional Evolution and therefore, the nature of life proposed in it.
The EDI Studio, already done, can be found in the corresponding book online.
The proposed model for scientific research on the theory of evolution assumes the following hypotheses:
Evolution with external verification of the genetic information transmitted for the studied capacity.
Existence of a function ξ that measures the different potentials of the capacity.
I believe the cognitive ability represented by the IQ test fulfill both requisites of the model of evolution that we need to verify the new scientific theory of evolution.
In fact, the possibility of verifying the Conditional Evolution through checking the existence of the method of Verification of the Genetic Information (VGI) is what makes it a scientific theory.
Therefore, in order to facilitate the understanding of the model and its statistical analysis, we are going to choose the controversial subject of heritability and evolution of intelligence. In addition, it will proof on of the main consequences of the Conditional Evolution regarding the cognitive paradigm.
Generally accepted IQ tests measure intelligence, although many authors doubt these measurements and even the unique concept of intelligence.
Numerous studies on evolution of intelligence based on individual IQ or intelligence quotient measurements exist. The empirical research and studies on the evolution of intelligence have some contradictory conclusions, whereas in studies with identical twins a correlation of 80-85% is reached, for other types of kin relations, decreases to a 30%.
For me, the conclusion is that genetic inheritance is the main cause of the evolution of intelligence, as high correlation between identical twins demonstrates.
The low correlation in the rest of the studies on evolution of intelligence is due to the incorrect definition of the form in which the inheritance is transmitted in agreement with the exposition of the General Theory of Conditional Evolution of Life and Mendelian genetics.
In spite of the adopted hypothesis about the evolution of intelligence, it could be possible that the model will not produce the expected results due to the multifunctional nature of the chosen variable, and the possibility that the genetic code could be situated in different chromosomes. This will make the statistical model design of the Mendelian combination of said chromosomes much more difficult.
It could also be the case that the study on the evolutionary physiology of intelligence showed that the heritability of intelligence were 50% but, at the same time, that it could be stated that the dominancy rules are consistent with the proposals of the Conditional Evolution depending on the existence of the method of Verification of the Genetic Information VIG which is, in short, the main objective of the model.
Nevertheless, the IQ refer to the relative position defined within a standardized function ξ (I) of the statistical distribution of the IQ studied for the validation process of this function.
The figure shows the shape of the Normal function ξ (IQ), which we are going to use. For each IQ value, the function indicates the accumulated probability that the IQ of the population is the same or less than the IQ reference value.
For example ξ(100) = 0.5 and the opposite function ξ_inv (Prob) = IQ, that means, ξ_inv (0.5) = 100.
The most generally accepted IQ are measured in relation to other individuals, in such a way that they referred to the relative position which is well-defined by a normal function ξ (IQ) of the statistical distribution of the intelligence quotients previously studied in the validation process of said function.
This function will link each one of its values with the accumulated percentile. Wechsler, Stanford-Binet and Cattell scales are the most commonly used. All these three use a normal function of average 100, however, they differ in the standard deviation (15, 16 and 24, respectively)
As its name indicates, the percentile is the percentage of the reference population which has a potential equal to or smaller than the referred distribution value. Thus, the percentile of value 100 of these distributions is 0.50 or 50%, as the mean of the Normal distribution is 100.
This particular case of evolution of intelligence has been chosen in order to formalize the general model. Although many more possibilities may exist, the following reasoning will be the same one, or at least a very similar one, for all of them.
The result of the combination of the four genes in agreement with Mendelian genetic significance will produce four different possibilities or cases. The mathematical expected average of the capacity of the new individual in agreement with the scientific theory of Conditional Evolution will be the sum of the expected averages of each one of the cases weighed by their probabilities.
EC descendant = P(D1) C(D1) + P(D2) C(D2) + P(D3) C(D3) + P(D4) C(D4)
Considering that the assumption of verification of the received genetic information, assumed by hypothesis in the study on evolution of intelligence, says that the dominant chromosome will be the one with less capacity, at the most it would only be possible to be expressed the potential of that gene in his integrity.
Despite this consideration, I will suppose in the empirical research, for simplification, that the cognitive ability express in its totality, since it is reasonable that for a specific capacity the greater chromosome contains practically all the information of the smaller gene plus an additional part.
Another aspect is that by hypothesis of the study on evolutionary psychology about intelligence, the more powerful gene or chromosome (or the part of the genetic information that is associated to the studied capacity) of each ancestor cannot be measured in an empirical research since it is not expressed in its integrity because only the contrasted part will be expressed.
For that reason, it is necessary to estimate its size as precisely as we can. If we always worked with probabilities of the central value of its mathematical expected average, when calculating the correlation between dependent variables and independent ones, the errors would tend to compensate.
Although we could measure the most powerful chromosome related to the evolution of intelligence, it would remain the problem of the randomness of the Mendelian inheritance.
P1a and P2b chromosomes are present in D2, while P1b and P2b are present in D4. Among these three chromosomes, only the potential of P1b, which is 100, is already known. Thus, in order to estimate the potential of D2 and D4 (ED2 and ED4), a previous estimate of P1a and P2b (EP1a and EP2b) will be needed.
We can reduce EP2b to its expected central value, this is, the average IQ values above P2a. Being the potential related to percentile (ξinv) the inverse function of ξ, we will obtain the following formula:
EP2b = ξinv [ξ (P2a) + (1 - ξ (P2a) / 2)]
As we can imagine, these intermediate value estimates are not very accurate when measured individually. However, the aim is to obtain unbiased estimates in view of the fact that, due to the effect of the Mendelian chromosome combination in the evolution of intelligence, the variance of the deviations will always be very high.
In short, if the result of the analysis to be performed with real data proves to be positive, the hypothesis that the evolution of intelligence is mostly due to genetic inheritance and that it follows the rules of evolution implied by the VGI method will be demonstrated.
Once the IQ data of the sample studies of the empirical research is available, it will be possible to analyze the correlation between the explanatory variables defined by the model with the explained ones.
[Fortunately, the book online of the EDI Study - Evolution and Design of Intelligence presents the results confirming the proposals of the scientific theory of Conditional Evolution]
Regardless the problem of the definition of intelligence in evolutionary psychology as a group of relational functions, in the present model of the scientific theory there are some simplifications to ease its presentation. For example, to make more coherent estimations of the evolution of the intelligence, surely it could be necessary to include:
The internal improvement of the genetic information in each generation could exceed 10% regarding evolution of intelligence.
The affinity filter, related to the lack of confirmation of the intellectual power in its totality as mentioned above.
Another factor, although not clear, could be the effect of the sexual selection related to the correlation of the intellectual power between chromosomes of both progenitors.
In any case, it is possible to make preliminary studies for the estimation of the previous parameters within the scientific research of the theory of evolution.
The three aspects mentioned above have been confirmed in the EDI Study - Evolution and Design of Intelligence. The book online of the EDI Study says that more than 500 million of coefficients of determination are calculated.
6.b.1. Research on evolution of memory and other cognitive functions
The hypothesis of verification of the received genetic information (VGI) could be applied in its in a negative form, or the opposite of that of evolution of intelligence and it would result to a reformulation of the model to be able to do the research of the scientific theory of evolution with new genetic studies.
Both assumptions comprise of the same scientific theory of the evolution and they would take place of simultaneous form for different capacities.
While for reliable or mathematical memory, the previously mentioned hypothesis about the Verification of Genetic Information method will be equal to the one of intelligence, for normal memory and intuition, it will be the opposite one.
The issue gets complicated in the case of other cognitive capacities such as language, linguistic memory or verbal reasoning due to the special characteristics of these cognitive processes.
These matters are studied more deeply on the page Evolutionary genetics and neuroscience included in the book Memory, language and other brain abilities of the Global Cognitive Theory.
An opposite behavior to that of the evolution of intelligence but similar to the one of non-mathematical memory or intuition could be expected in the study on inheritance and evolution of abilities related to music and art.
The problem for carrying out statistical analyses on the evolutionary psychology of these abilities is the lack of reliable indications with continuous variables for these abilities; contrary to, in theory, the case of the evolution of intelligence due to the existence of intelligence quotients.