Survival Of The Slowest? Study Suggests That Less Intelligent Soldiers More Likely To Survive In War

220px-CaumontadvanceAmong the other costs of war, there may be a type of counter Darwinistic effect on a population according to a new study. A new British study has found that the most intelligent soldiers in World War II had a higher mortality rate in combat. In other words, the war favors the least intelligent soldiers in terms of survival.

The study by Ian Deary, a psychologist at the University of Edinburgh, and his colleagues used IQ scores for Scots who died and who survived the war. The study found that 491 Scots who died had an average IQ score of 100.8. Several thousand survivors who had taken the same test averaged 97.4.

There may be various reasons for this difference. One of the most obvious might be that more intelligent soldiers tend to be placed in greater leadership roles and are thus exposed to greater combat threats. The study also refuted a prior theory that less intelligent men were simply more likely to be rejected by the military. In reality, men who didn’t serve were more intelligent than surviving veterans.

Here is a link to the study: Scottish Study

26 thoughts on “Survival Of The Slowest? Study Suggests That Less Intelligent Soldiers More Likely To Survive In War”

  1. Umm renegade….cavemen did it. Wth have you been…?.the cabbage cart left yesterday. Ketchup.

    1. “The court ruled that despite the evidence to the contrary of New London’s claim, they are still justified in refusing applicants with high IQs “because it matters not whether the city’s decision was correct so long as it was rational.””

      Right… like it is really, really rational to refuse to hire smart people. Looks like someone has been doing some selective hiring on the court as well.

    2. Hi Neo.

      As I read the referred link, I was “with” the argument until the author got to the part about what smart people don’t do. First, the APA long ago detached itself from the concept of an “IQ” test. None of the tests measure the full intelligence of an individual. Tests only measure criteria for which it is designed and then assumptions/applications are made, statements by an entity like the police force not withstanding. How many times has the phrase “over qualified” been used in other venues? One is outside the range of applicant requirements, often because of more education (more intelligent?).

      Second, the “smart people don’t” is disingenuous. The author evidently ignores the much larger scale atrocities visited upon innocents by drones, JV team declarations, setting up a system which destroyed the housing market etc…all of which were accomplished by brilliant degreed men. Kill one man…its murder. Kill or economically destroy masses of others….its politics. A rephrase: “war is politics by another means.”

      So therefore, the more intelligent the higher the risk of even more damage? The Towers weren’t brought down by imbeciles. Hmmmm. Smart people don’t …….. ?

Comments are closed.