We never knew for sure whether it was real, what caused it or whether it was limited only to the left side of the curve.  But the Flynn Effect appears to be at the end of its days in Europe, at least.

This from the Times:-

WE ARE ABOUT AS SMART AS WE’RE GOING TO GET, SAYS IQ PIONEER
* Test Results are starting to level out
* Morality skills are the next step

It is a common refrain, repeated in response to every new television reality show and every bumper crop of school exam results: society is dumbing down. Scientists have long argued the opposite, pointing to the now widely accepted “Flynn effect”, which shows that over the past century average IQ scores have improved across the developed world, irrespective of class or creed.

Now the man who first observed this effect, the psychologist James Flynn, has made another observation: intelligence test scores have stopped rising.

Far from indicating that now we really are getting dumber, this may suggest that certain of our cognitive functions have reached — or nearly reached — the upper limits of what they will ever achieve, Professor Flynn believes. In other words, we can’t get much better at the mental tasks we are good at, no matter how hard we try.

If we are to make any further progress, we will have to start exercising different parts of our brain, particularly the parts controlling language acquisition and empathy, according to Professor Flynn, an emeritus professor at the University of Otago in New Zealand.

So a couple of observations about this.

First, the Flynn Effect has been tossed into more IQ arguments than Arthur Jensen has hairs on his eminent head - most always, of course, by the environmentalist left.  It has been interesting, if not altogether surprising, to contrast the reaction on the race-realist right to this activity.  Has it launched a campaign of outright denial, blatently ignoring all evidence in favour of Flynn?  Has it launched attacks on the professional reputation of Flynn proponents?

The difference between the realists’ response and that of the scientific left to, say, EO Wilson in the 1970s, eventually driving sociobiology underground, or to Rushton in the 90s, almost leading to prosecution, is instructive and should be a source of pride among the men of the right.  Confident intellectual foundations are a wonderful thing, and the execrable behaviour of the leftists can only be explained by a lack of them.

It has ever been so.

The other fascinating tidbit from the Times story is James Flynn’s notion that :-

The challenge for humanity now is to enhance our ability to debate moral and social questions intelligently. One way to do this might be to concentrate on reading great works of literature which expand our vocabulary, critical acumen and emotional maturity.

Well, no James, sorry.  A weakness in debating such issues maturely is likely present in our benighted age.  But there are very good, rather Durkheimian reasons for that.  I am pretty certain that sympathetic markers such as the beauty and elegance of the spoken and written word, so evident in the long history of the English language, will show that our shortcomings today are wholly environmental.  For example, can our boys in Iraq flay intellectual skin with the same burning endeavour as the men of Cromwell’s New Model Army in their famous constitutional debates with the Levellers?

But to rid ourselves of our “emotional lumpenness” we must dispose of such sink issues as egalitarianism, multiculturalism and Third World immigration, economism (particularly in respect to working mothers), the war on the family, etc ... in short, all the elements of advanced liberalism that lie on our chests like the weight of a dozen dead men.  Let the natural bonds prosper again and stability reign.  The real talents of our people will reveal themselves soon enough, and psychologists can measure it then for all they are worth.

On that basis I would confidently predict a rosy future for an “emotional” corrolate of the Flynn Effect.  But on none other.