2.c.4) Woman and man intelligence

The possible sexual differentiation in intelligence between woman and man is a delicate subject. There is a consensus about the differences between female and male sensitivity. Consequently, the groups of primary relational functions that support these sensitivities should be somewhat different.

Water-Lily Pond by Monet (Public domain image)
Water-Lily Pond by Monet

If a determined test of intelligence collects the feminine sensitivity of men and women, we would have to wait for women to obtain better results and vice versa.
All of us memorize a representation of others where, on top of their image, we include some characteristics. Among them is an intuitive estimation of that person's intelligence.

As this approximation is carried out on a personal scale, it should not be surprising that many women think that they are much more intelligent than men, and vice versa. All men and all women are right from their point of view or scale of reference.

An example of how complicated is the subject of sexual differentiation in intelligence between woman and man would be to speak about the beauty of intelligence and the intelligence of beauty. Both affirmations are correct and, therefore, elemental relational functions that support them should exist. About this subject, without wanting to go any deeper in it, we can cite the existence of certain symmetries.

Another example could be the different results that come out of mathematical calculations if we are working with variables rounded to integer or numbers or with decimals. Sometimes one way is better and other times, the other way; but, if the program is very complicated, perhaps both should not, or would not be efficient if maintained simultaneously.

In the complicated calculations used in the demonstration of the heritability of intelligence, the variables item’s order had with different criteria, and the results vary sensitively depending on the criterion used.

If the natural scale is unknown, a solution would be a neutral scale concerning gender. Some of the most relevant tests of today use different batteries of forms or questions, which through adequate ponderation, achieve an overall neutral evaluation of the tests.

In some cases, there is an adjustment with a different scale according to gender; the TC1 test is an example based on a series of dominoes.

In other cases, the correction is according to age. For ages above 30, the result is compensated considering that there is a fall in performance although not in potential. In short, it deals with obtaining equality by age in a conventional fashion.

It could also go the other way, that is to say, theoretical inequality. For example, the youngest may be more intelligent due to evolutionary reasons; the statistical work in the annex obtains better adjustments in the studied correlations for an average 10% improvement in each generation.

The interpretation of statistical data is not only risky but also the data can be bias.
An example of the difference between men and women which is accepted by both men and women with a good sense of humor is the following. Men prefer women with the lateral symmetry of 90-60-90 and women prefer an exponential growth of 10-23-1023 in their man, that is to say, a 10 in intelligence and 1023 in $.

Continuing with the humor, if men had to define a single measurement that encompassed the three previously mentioned parameters, they would use the mean squared error and women the sum.

Now, let us see how we can contribute to some observed variations from a scientific point of view.

  • Human life expectancy

    Women have a higher estimated life expectancy between 5 and 10 % more than men in most countries. In Spain, this supposes approximately six years (86 years in women versus 80 years for men). It seems clear that there must be something better in women’s constitution apart from the existence of other factors such as a lower rate of tobacco consumption among females or different types of work.

    According to the Conditional Evolution of Life, the first function of the sexual differentiation is to serve as a genetic filter between the information received from the male and female progenitors. The theory mentioned above also affirms that women provide an intact copy of the genetic information, with the advantage of having its phenotypical viability guaranteed.

    Consequently, the filter of two X chromosomes should result in a more stable structure than the one made up of the XY chromosomes. The same argumentation can be used for the rest of the 22 pairs of human chromosomes and to those of other animals with sexual differentiation. It would not be surprising that it resulted in higher female longevity; explaining, at least in part, the observed reality.

  • Gender differences in human intelligence in the lower threshold

    An interesting issue will be the stability effect mentioned in the previous point about human intelligence in the lower part of the typical bell curve of Gauss.

    The EDI Study – Evolution and Design of Intelligence detects, one out of five cases, what it denominates genetic accidents in the evolution of intelligence which are very relevant in quantitative terms.

    It would not be surprising either that the significant decreases in human intelligence due to said accidents would occur more in men than in women.

  • Gender differences in human intelligence in the upper threshold

    As in the case above of the dominoes series.

    Following the Conditional Evolution of Life, the Global Cognitive Theory and the empirical results from the EDI Study women do not modify their genetic information, and most of the elemental functions which make up intelligence have a genetic nature. The X chromosomes would have at least a generation behind in evolution with sexual differentiation and two backward generations on average.

    Unless the X chromosome may pass 100 % updated to the following generation every time it coincides with the Y chromosome, this fact could explain the low female participation in highly gifted associations, in nominations for the Nobel Prize, the few inventions made by women, a lower rate in management positions.

    Consequently, there is no necessity of restoring to a historical specialism of jobs or being particularly negative towards men accusing them of gender favoritism.

    Socially, it seems that this mentioned gratuitous accusation is not rude, there is a possible scientific explanation of some specific characteristics of human intelligence.

We consider the scientific nature of the Conditional Evolution of Life, the Global Cognitive Theory and the results of the EDI Study are clear. Due to the social sensitivity regarding the matters discussed, it should be desirable to carry out more research on the evolution and design of human intelligence, which may confirm the results hereinabove mentioned and obtain a higher sensitivity and significance of the model for this specific aspect of the update of the X chromosome.

In the page about the Evolution of Intelligence included in the book of the Conditional Evolution of Life, we propose the new Darwinout and Menssalina experiments, which have a more straightforward methodology and easy to carry out.