Groups of humans are culturally smarter than any individual human because culture persists. So the smartest human can invent something useful, and other humans can then expand and elaborate on the invention.
Specific groups of humans - committees, office groups, political groups, etc - may well be dumber than the human average.
For cultural intelligence you need specific processes that generate, share, and try to maximise collective intelligence. Most groups lack those processes, and without them humans reduce to a confused and milling herd which is easily led by charismatic individuals - who are not necessarily the best and brightest.
Edit to add: processes to maximise collective human intelligence (like science, and persistent education) are exactly analogous to the processes that are claimed to be needed for GAI. Humanity as a whole is already an evolving GAI which has completely outperformed the limited potential of individual humans.
Specific groups of humans - committees, office groups, political groups, etc - may well be dumber than the human average.
For cultural intelligence you need specific processes that generate, share, and try to maximise collective intelligence. Most groups lack those processes, and without them humans reduce to a confused and milling herd which is easily led by charismatic individuals - who are not necessarily the best and brightest.
Edit to add: processes to maximise collective human intelligence (like science, and persistent education) are exactly analogous to the processes that are claimed to be needed for GAI. Humanity as a whole is already an evolving GAI which has completely outperformed the limited potential of individual humans.