Good Breeding

Being a city boy, I used to laugh at the strange attitudes of the stiff and stilted upper classes as portrayed in old English films. These snobbish and bloodless characters always seemed obsessed by good breeding and good stock. As if people were horses. And as an American raised in a monarch-free and class-less society (as I naively thought when younger), the concept that character is directly and perhaps solely dictated by genes, has been as foreign to me, and I dare say most of my fellow Americans, as Liz and Phil’s silly hats.
But farmers all over the world believe in the influence of genes. So do dog and cat breeders. So the question arises, if the offspring of animals can be imparted with certain qualities or deficiencies, according to whom their parents mixed genes with, why are human beings generally considered to be different?

The answer, of course, is we are quite obviously influenced. We’re just not allowed to talk about certain aspects of our genetic inheritance. While it’s politically correct to note that little Malaysians who mate with little Malaysians get more little Malaysians, it is far less politically correct to point out that enormously obese citizens from Manchester or Munich who breed with similarly obese individuals, are destined to get porkers for progeny. Humans, we must admit if we have any honesty, can breed ourselves fat, thin, short, tall, quick, slow, black, white, healthy, sickly.

The whole subject of breeding becomes especially and dangerously muddied when intelligence is brought into the discussion. Any mention of I.Q. tests and bell curves receives howls of protests from many quarters, making the entire subject a minefield. And those of us who brazenly use humor and sarcasm as a substitute for soberness and commitment, are particularly susceptible to outraged condemnation.

For example, if someone such as myself, should point out that the world’s population of Jews takes pride in its universal reputation for intelligence, but that that same intelligence is probably the result of 3,000 years of persecutors weeding out the less quick-witted of the tribe, this paradox (and paradoxes are, after all, the cornerstone of all Jewish humor) becomes glaringly obvious, - but in this case not at all amusing. It is, after all, a bit difficult to praise a group by saying, “You’re a smart bunch.. mainly because the dumber of you are no longer around to embarrass you.”

But perhaps this particular observation endows us with a useful definition for intelligence: heightened alertness. As Doctor Johnson pointed out, “the knowledge that one is about to be hanged has a tendency to concentrate the mind wonderfully.”
But having noted the beneficial result of persecution on the Jewish and other ethnic groups, we come face to face with this conundrum: If dumb ass accidents and wars tend to hit dumber people harder than the quick witted, why are we as a race, so relatively stupid?

Put another way, if we assume the average I.Q. of the cro magnon living 30,000 years ago was that of a Jerry Springer fan today, why hasn’t time and misfortune weeded out the dumber, so that we enjoy an average intelligence today of 300 or 3,000.. instead of the measly 110, or whatever the current average is judged to be? Why ain’t we smarter?

Perhaps we ain’t smarter because there is some sort of self-regulation mechanism in effect. Perhaps nature tends to weed out the smart asses, too. As the Chinese note, it is the nail that sticks up that gets hammered down. And in fact, when it comes to people, we can actually see this craving to be hammered down evidenced by comedians (need I note the high proportion of the descendants of Abraham here?) who loudly and annoyingly demand attention so that they can display their awesome wit for all the world to see. And when a comedian fails to impress and he admits his defeat, he notes, “I died.”

..and so the rest of us must go back for another fishing expedition at the gene pool to find our wits.