> Have you thought about the obvious implication that embryo selection with polygenic scoring could be used to lower the gap between genetically privileged types of people you describe and the average couple deciding to apply to procedure?

Of course. If we boost an entire generation’s IQ at birth and eventually introduce them into the adult population, what is going to happen is that the boosted generation is going to basically dominate the right hand side of the graph. If you visualize two bell curves superimposed on one another, with one of those curves shifted to the right, then that’s what you’re going to get.

The degree of augmentation is going to make a big difference. During the era of the Flynn effect, we sort of had this happen naturally and we handled it just fine, but a 20 point boost would basically obliterate things.

I’m not necessarily opposed to doing this BTW. I just think it’s going to be extremely disruptive and unpredictable.

> over generations it can compound into a more thoughtful, creative, capable and lively humanity.

Yes, that’s what the original eugenicists thought, too. Here’s the problem, though: what do you do with all of those old and busted natural humans who are less thoughtful, less creative, less capable, less lively? Because those people are really mad that they lost their jobs, and they’re obviously not as intelligent or beautiful or morally good as the new and improved humanity. I mean, all you’ve done was to erase the unfair gap between the below average member of your generation and the above average member of theirs. Those people are all privileged and entitled jerks, and all they’re doing is causing problems.

Oh, did you really think we’d also manage to isolate and eliminate the gene responsible for the human tendency to dehumanize the outgroup? You sweet summer child.