You are seemingly contradicting yourself. On the one hand, you want to
indicate that other factors on other chromosomes are in the mix that gives
us "intelligence." Then you want to make it into an exclusivity? Clearly,
this is a fuzzy logic sort of argument, as most real world analyses are.
However, the fact that having good mitochondrial DNA (which ARE exclusively
inherited via the mother) would probably enhance good DNA specific for
intellect is pretty much irrelevant to the argument, as the mitochondrial
DNA influence just about everything. In so far as the influences have been
experimentally isolated, the intelligence specific genes seem to be
exclusively on the female sex chromosomes.
As I pointed out further, there is a secondary causal chain here as well, in
that good genes for one survival factor may mask bad genes for another. If
male intelligence is already discounted by the argument you quoted, then it
is further discounted by the fact that it might mask really valuable or
really bad (from the woman's genetic line's point of view) traits. There is
even a further corrolary to this in that intelligence on the male side may
actually lead to general misevaluation on the female side. Smart, sneaky
men could both mask deficiencies in other areas and also conceal the very
fact that they are smart! Thus, male intelligence becomes a hazard to the
process of mating choice.
>From: Alejandro Dubrovsky <email@example.com>
>Subject: Re: buns vs brains
>Date: Sun, 25 Jul 1999 19:56:42 +1000 (GMT+1000)
>[lots snipped from Phil Osborn's post, but part of it said]
>There is also the fact that the genes necessary for intelligence are not
>present on the male sex chromosome. Thus, men inherit their intelligence
>exclusively from the mother, or so the evidence points so far. Women, on
>the other hand, inherit from both parents. However, in most primitive
>societies, a smart daughter is competition, whereas a smart son is an
>asset, so this gives women an incentive to mate with dumb jocks, which
>reduces the likely intelligence of their daughters while having no effect
>on the intelligence of their sons.
>This doesn't seem quite right. Even if the "genes necessary for
>intelligence" are not present on the male sex chromosome (Y chromosome?)
>it does not mean that they are not present on any of the chromosomes
>passed from the male side unless all of them are located on the X
>chromosome. Assuming this is not the case, intelligence on offsprings of
>both sexes would be influenced by both parents. What am i missing here?