https://www.reddit.com/r/Objectivism/comments/1j6605z/a_question_for_objectivists/
created by Unhappy-Land-3534 on 08/03/2025 at 01:32 UTC
0 upvotes, 6 top-level comments (showing 6)
Do you agree that achieving a certain threshold of dietary protein intake is causal for increased intelligence? That if it drops below a certain threshold then decreased intelligence occurs, specifically among developing children.
-----
If you do agree, how do you rectify this reality with the concept of "free will". Do rocks have some degree of free will? Is free will a spectrum, the more intelligent you are, the more free will you have?
-----
And lastly, if the first scenario is true (nutrition increases intelligence), then at what point does an "individual" become a separate "free individual" and not a product of and a reaction to their material conditions? When their brain has finished developing doesn't make sense to me, because the brain has only developed because of material conditions, necessarily outside of said "individuals" control.
-----
Bonus question: do any of you find the recent scientific evidence that our behavior is affected by non-human-genomic biota in our gut compelling? If not, why not? And do you consider the microbes in your gut to be part of your "individual"?
Comment by Industrial_Tech at 08/03/2025 at 02:03 UTC
5 upvotes, 1 direct replies
I'll try to point you to where you can find answers:
1st question about diet and IQ: try google scholar
2nd question about free will: —Ayn Rand Lexicon[1] http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/free%5C_will.html[2][3]
1: http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/free_will.html
2: http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/free%5C_will.html
3: http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/free_will.html
Bonus question: Google scholar
Comment by globieboby at 08/03/2025 at 02:45 UTC*
2 upvotes, 1 direct replies
Does nutrition impact human development? Yes.
How do I and Objectivism rectify this with free will and causes? There isn’t anything to rectify. The emergence of free will is not causeless.
Is it compelling that behaviour can be impacted by things? Compelling about what? Does Objectivism say anywhere that behavior can’t be impacted by other things?
Comment by ausdoug at 08/03/2025 at 05:03 UTC
2 upvotes, 0 direct replies
My opinion is irrelevant, it either does or it doesn't. Intelligence doesn't affect your free will, but may influence your ability to realise it. But even that's not a direct causal link, as there's plenty of dumb fucks smart enough to make the most of their free will, while a bunch of genius people waste theirs by not considering it outside of their sheltered existence.
Comment by prometheus_winced at 08/03/2025 at 05:19 UTC
2 upvotes, 1 direct replies
I’m not a nutritionist and I don’t think an answer to the nutrition question matters.
The key point is that no other thing is *more* responsible for yourself than you own intelligence and awareness. Whether affected by air quality, alcohol, poor parenting, or culture … ultimately you are the singular responsible pilot.
Comment by AuAndre at 08/03/2025 at 15:50 UTC
1 upvotes, 0 direct replies
I'll take a different swing at this. What others have said is largely correct. I'll add that, if science says it disproves free will, then question that science 100%. Likely the experiment itself is sound, but the statistics and especially the interpretation are almost certainly off.
(I am literally a scientist so don't come at me with "oh you're so anti-science". Recognizing that there are problems in the scientific community, especially around how scientists build and interpret models, is not anti-science. Unquestionably taking what anyone who calls themselves an expert says at face value is actually being anti-science)
Comment by KL-13 at 10/03/2025 at 05:18 UTC
1 upvotes, 0 direct replies
isn't IQ supposedly inborn, and if brain function was that goal Id go with fishoil and creatine