Are the well travelled smarter?

[geokker]

It is generally accepted that Humankind originated in southern Africa. From a single region, our genetic ancestors spread throughout the globe over land, ice-bridges and water.

 

From a simple, naturally selective standpoint, would it be reasonable to argue that those groups of migrant generations tough and smart enough to travel farther and through more challenging environments promoted the occurrence of greater cognitive ability in subsequent descendents?

 

For instance, the slave trade working out of Northern Africa selected men for strength. Those able to survive the journey to North America, the subsequent oppression and successfully perpetuate their genes have arguably imbued a legacy of physical robustness.

[Tormod]

Pardon me...are you claiming that slaves are well travelled???

[Fishteacher73]

Pardon me...are you claiming that slaves are well travelled???

 

Have Chains...Will Travel....

[geokker]

Pardon me...are you claiming that slaves are well travelled???

That was simply an example of population selection for particular traits - although, Africa to Europe and America were seriously epic voyages during the 18th/19th centuries.

 

My question is whether any of the smart cookies here can add weight to my argument - that humans/proto-humans who travelled farthest, presumably encountering more varied conditions subsequently produced stronger, more intelligent descendants.

[Bio-Hazard]

Junk. The only psychobiological side of this discussion would be that the hippocampus's size begins to deteriorate as you are away from educational and enlightening surroundings.

[Fishteacher73]

There are also some serious doubts about a single point origin of modern man.

[Buffy]

my argument - that humans/proto-humans who travelled farthest, presumably encountering more varied conditions subsequently produced stronger, more intelligent descendants.

Are the Australian Aborigines the most advanced? Initially they went the farthest distance over the most difficult route until the "Indians" went to America...hmmm. Doesn't sound like it. According to United Airlines I'm exremely well travelled (I'm close to the million mile club!), and I'd like to think I'm smarter than most folks! :)

 

Cheers,

Buffy

[Tormod]

My question is whether any of the smart cookies here can add weight to my argument - that humans/proto-humans who travelled farthest, presumably encountering more varied conditions subsequently produced stronger, more intelligent descendants.

 

I think we'd need to define "far" here. Early humans didn't travel across the contintents, you know - they would travel as far as was necessary to get food and other supplies.

 

BTW if distance is a way to increase intelligence in offspring, then the lunar astronauts must have the most intelligent people of all! :)

[HydrogenBond]

The migration of the ancient folk was probably less due to recreational travel as it was connected to the business of survival. the new environments that were discovered required new adaptation techniques. This implies, new and changing memories and ingenuity for survival. Those who ended up further north, where winters required new methods of food storage and cold weather survival learned further survival techniques that may have made them smarter with respect to nature and survival skills.

 

On the other hand, staying in one place also has its advantages. Rather than waste so much time trying to learning to survive, one has more free time to think and invent. The progression of the mind comes from the restlessness of one's fellow humans, who are constantly pushing the envelope of law/crime, culture, knowledge and salemanship. In this case one is constantly traveling within their minds to new places and having to adapt to the changing cultural environment.