A brand new study has linked liberalism, atheism and male sexual exclusivity to higher intelligence rates. People who possessed those characteristics had higher IQs than those who were conservative, religious or slept around. (Women’s IQs were not determined by sexual exclusivity.) The study states that we are all evolved from “primitive traits” that evolution has worked so hard to overcome.

The study, conducted by evolutionary psychologist Satoshi Kanazawa from the London School of Economics and Political Science, will be published in the March edition of Social Psychology Quarterly. The people surveyed were adolescents, grades 7-12 from the 1994-1995 school year. Are we really asking 7-12th graders if they sleep around or not? This seems like more of a question for an older audience, and one that will probably change as these teenagers lose their pimples and become fully engaged adults.

The study’s definition of religion was paranoia. Ancient human ancestors saw gods everywhere, were scared, and then ran away and escaped threats. Because we are so evolved now, paranoia doesn’t help us out any more. However, other psychology studies emphasize that religion actually helps people, even today. Some religious beliefs create happier people, ones who are better at feeling emotions and connecting with others.

As we progressed evolutionarily, men overcame their need for gods, their need to prove themselves to many women and their conservative tendencies. So, what of Nicolaus Copernicus, Johannes Kepler, Galileo Galilei, Isaac Newton, Carolus Linnaeus, Gregor Mendel, Louis Pasteur and Lord Kelvin, who held to their religious beliefs? Well, they must have just had dumb luck.

Liberals, as defined by the study, are those who would be more likely to help other people, and in fact vote for legislation that helps give resources to others. Conservatives are your typical scrooges who keep everything for themselves and only really care about people they are close to. But, I guess for liberals, “do unto others as you would have them do unto you” balances out their atheistic nature. The study is, in fact, as stereotypical as people I encounter in my everyday life.

A scary side effect of this sort of study could be an extension of labeling and discrimination. The study states that the purpose is not to ostracize people based on political affiliation, religious beliefs or sexual preferences, yet it obviously does throughout the study. This form of ostracism only serves to highlight students who may or may not be smarter than those who are in the “dumb” category. Also, I am unsure, given the results of the study, if they are arguing that only those possessing all of these characteristics are smarter, or if falling into one of these categories will work.

One aspect does not liberalism and conservatism make. The study does not take into account the meat of conservative and liberal politics, such as gay rights, abortion or gun control. The definitions for liberalism, conservatism and religiosity were murky. So, once again, we are boiling everything down to a nice and tidy result, which does not correctly analyze the American public or their beliefs. Not to mention that the subjects of this study have not even made it out of high school; maybe by the time they hit the university environment, they’ll shun the very things they embraced.

Colleen is a graduate student.