[From Mensa Bulletin, issue #170, October, 1973.]

Lately it seems that more than a little soul-searching, both individual and collective, is appearing in the Bulletin.  Unfortunately, it would appear also that such soul-searching is not only justifiable, but long overdue. . . .  
 

Indeed, I submit that much of the preconception of what Mensa could do for humanity is ideal- istic, and in all likelihood unattainable, at least for the present and the immediate future. . . .

Before we attempt to evaluate whether or not Mensa as an organization is viable, or whether or not intelligence alone is common enough ground to mold together a cohesive group, we must first examine what Mensa purports to be and to stand for.  Karl Ross's editorial in the June 1973 Bulletin states the purposes to be "(1) conducting research in psychology and the social sciences; (2) identifying and fostering human intelligence for the benefit of humanity; and (3) providing opportunities for social contact among members". . . .

If we examine these "purposes" carefully, we find, first, that they appear to be a rather specious set of aims for an organization of this scope; second, that they are not particularly relevant to the potential of such a group; and third, that Mensa is not even living up to them such as they are!  . . .I was made aware of Mensa as an indirect result of a research venture in the social sciences...but have seen precious little since. . . .  As to the second stated goal, I defy anyone to translate that particular bit of rhetoric into something tangible and/or meaningful. . . .  If we were actually benefiting humanity in some measurable or demonstrable way, we would have no dilemma of identity to talk about.  The third goal is indeed regularly achieved, and is, to a degree, a desirable consequence of membership in any organization, so one might well deduce that, aside from the ego-trip possibilities noted earlier, Mensa is nothing more than a social club. . . .

. . .The really puzzling, and likewise elusive, aspect to the Mensa problem, if we may use that terminology, is in the "Why," namely, why is Mensa in the rut that it's in?  We naturally concede the point that it is, otherwise this article and those which triggered it would be moot and would not have been written.

Many readers have noted that they "expected wonderful things" of Mensa, or that they were "idealistic in expecting Mensa to work toward easing the malaise's of mankind" or some such other preconception.  Indeed, I submit that much of the preconception of what Mensa could do for humanity is idealistic, and in all likelihood unattainable, at least for the present and the immediate future. . . .  The elusive but probably universal truth of the matter is really very simple, indeed, perhaps too simple to be believed at first glance. . . .  Stated simply, it is at best highly unlikely that any democratic government, and very few of any other variety, are sufficiently trusting, wise, lacking in ego, or genuinely beneficial in practice to pay attention to any particular group of "self-appointed saviors of mankind," no matter how impressive their credentials; and these self-same individuals referred to will never attain elective or appointive office in sufficient numbers to bring about any significant changes.  This will be either because the people at large won't elect them if they do run, or because such people generally have a natural aversion to politics in the first place.  As the German writer Hegel once noted, "History teaches us that man has never learned anything from history". . . .

So, what do we do?  We can, and indeed must, try to achieve what is right, whether our recommendations are solicited or not, and whether they are utilized or not. . . .  We must become collectively more responsible. . . .  Regardless of what is said or thought, let us no longer be victims of our own inertia....

[Previous] [Index] [Next]