I've been reading a study on this and I find it completely fascinating. There are basically two views on where the current generations stand compared to generations past and where the future generations will stand in general intelligence.
View 1: The current and future generations are (are going to be) more intelligent simply due to the complexity and wealth of current information. This basically asserts that we are learning more information faster than previous generations, and that we are learning things that are more complex than or previously unknown to previous generations. While I find that this is, in fact, the case it does not guarantee that our generations are actually retaining information. The flaw in this is that we have to receive the information and then retain it for future use. Without retention, we are not learning anything, and thus intelligence will be mediocre at best. However, if they were to retain information such that references are minimized then intelligence will generally be far higher than past generations. Another con that I find in this view is that while we are learning information faster it puts a large strain on the students to study all the time and abandon social life altogether. Parents are no help when it comes to this, and they push their kids even harder. This can lead even the smartest of students into a life of laziness where they are free from the otherworldly pressure (post-graduation of high school usually).
View 2: Books. What are your thoughts on them? According to several United States studies the reading of books has decreased by approximately 17% among 18-24 year old people over the past 20 years. This does not mean that younger people are not reading, it just means that they are not reading books. Students who were given a survey honestly spoke and said that the internet had replaced books in just about all facets. The internet normally would not be a problem, if younger people were able to retain the same information they would from books and newspapers. However, this has turned out not to be the case. According to a survey of 17,000 students teens are more likely able to tell you who the last American Idol was than who the Speaker of the House is. A large majority of students would fail a general Citizenship Test (should one have been made, this was based on accepted question pools for a proposed Citizenship Test). Even more would score low or average on an intelligence test based on general intelligence but score abnormally high on an intelligence test based on popular culture. I think the reason that this is the case is because the internet can be easily referenced at just about any time. With such a convenient resource, why would you have to retain any information at all? Just go back to the internet. With books, however, you wouldn't want to read them over and over and over just for one piece of information, would you? You'd read it maybe two or three times and be done with it, for the information would stick.
The digital age will bring in idiots the likes of which we have never witnessed. Idiocracy may be a reality if it keeps up.
What do you think?