If I understand correctly, techniques like CRISPR might allow for for gene editing in adult humans. If so, how much would you be willing to pay to have your IQ increased by say 10 points? I think I would be willing to pay $10,000 if the risks of something bad happening because of the treatment would be low.
You would also need some way of re-inducing plasticity in the brain's connectome. This seems less likely to be feasible after adulthood. Also, IQ is a lousy measurement scale. Ten points means a lot more to someone with an 85 or 95 IQ than to someone with 120.
Super-Intelligent Humans Are Coming
61–70 of 83 posts
Re: Super-Intelligent Humans Are Coming
#62How does that fit with the popular notion that intelligence is independent of race? Isn't the definition of race essentially just different genetic background?
Re: Super-Intelligent Humans Are Coming
#63That's an amazingly ignorant comment. First of all, the better evidence is behind the idea that currently observed high human IQ, when the "g" factor is factored into consideration, consists mostly just of luckily lacking deficiencies in function that other human individuals have. In other words, the centuries-long factor-analytic approach mostly suggests that high-IQ individuals luckily lack "general stupidity," but still are subject to hard limits on human cognition (Mackintosh, IQ and Human Intelligence second edition 2011, pages 155-156).
And the hard limits on human cognition are intractable, and actually illustrated by the article kindly submitted here. Psychologist Keith R. Stanovich points out in his book What Intelligence Tests Miss that even very high-IQ individuals (studied in studies of members of high-IQ societies) are still subject to most human cognitive biases, and they can be MORE subject to delusional beliefs than members of the general public because they can make up elaborate rationalizations for anything they choose to believe, including a belief in superintelligence.
I doubt the statements in this article also because there is a long line of research that goes back to before when the article author was born on selective breeding of mice and rats for high intelligence in their behavioral context. (One kind of test of intelligence given to rats and mice is running through mazes to find food.) Since before the author was born, there have been purebred strains of "maze-bright" and "maze-dull" rats that have been tested by psychologists. Now that there are gene technology methods in animal research, there are transgenic mice with knocked-out genes and added genes, and the author significantly fails to mention any experimentation in animal models that shows that his speculation is likely to become true.
The Wikipedia article on IQ classification adequately cites references to demonstrate that the IQ scale is strictly ordinal, so indeed a notion of "IQ 1000" is meaningless.
If you'd like to read a more thoughful article on genetic influences on human IQ, by a researcher who has been closer to the research for longer and who has published in better journals than the author whose essay was kindly submitted here, see Wendy Johnson's article "Understanding the Genetics of Intelligence: Can Height Help? Can Corn Oil?"[1] which has an excellent review of decades of research on genetics and on human intelligence.
[1] https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Understanding+the+Genet...
Re: Super-Intelligent Humans Are Coming
#64I don't know if there is any statistical correlation or not, but (as the article alludes to) it does seem that super intelligent people are more prone to some kind of other deficiencies, and particularly social issues. Can anyone shed more light on whether this is true or not? Anecdotally, one of my best friends (extremely intelligent, Cum Laude engineering student) went "off the rails" a few years after graduating.…
Our ancestors were not so benighted as we have been told: ignorance is, indeed, bliss.
Re: Super-Intelligent Humans Are Coming
#651. Intelligence is an ability to observe, gather feedback based on past observations, and see patterns at a speed much faster than others at a lower general level. The growth in insight can be exponential, but it also means you start thinking at levels of abstraction and patterns that are layers above people at other levels. You struggle to communicate.
2. High Intelligence is not correlated with high moral or other views - at its base, it means speed in some directions an individual is prone to have. If they find a career path that allows them to speed in that direction, they thrive, if not, you see a lot of psychological challenges over time.
3. Socially, the higher your IQ, the more likely you are to skip steps in explaining your thoughts and to be misunderstood because your thinking might be several levels of abstraction above the people your're talking to. People at the 150IQ general level are rarely happy working with or friending people below 120. Given a propensity to specialize it a field rarely touched by others - one can get quite lonely in their thoughts and lose the social skills needed to develop normal friendships. Unless you are lucky enough to be surrounded by peers, you may be very unhappy. That unhappiness can shift to negative, downright trolling behaviors for some people.
4. Given the above, a lot of potential is lost. For every Einstein, there are likely several hiding in corners wondering what is wrong with them.
I've been thinking about and working on prototypes for a platform that would be helpful to unite people with niche and advanced interests, so they can collaborate freely. Would love to connect with others interested in the topic. (Edit: typos)
Re: Super-Intelligent Humans Are Coming
#66I wonder about the implications of this for super-intelligent AI...
Re: Super-Intelligent Humans Are Coming
#67That must be a somewhat daunting procedure for scientists in the genetic field; creating humans that are much, much smarter than themselves, likely rendering themselves obsolete very quickly.
There'd still be at least a generation before the kids are up to speed. Even if they're of the "finish HS by 12, BS by 13, PhD by 16" types, they still have to accumulate a large amount of knowledge and practice, to actively participate in the science.
Re: Super-Intelligent Humans Are Coming
#68I dont think we need smarter humans, i think we need more normal-intelligence humans who like working hard.
I respectfully disagree. We need a society of people who hate working hard but, very importantly , are deeply empathic so they won't just leave the hard work for other people. Those are the people who automate the hard things away and share their work so other people can do the same, to leave time for science, abstract creative pursuits, recreation, etc.
If you mean share for free, then I don't think that's ever likely on any large scale. You're talking about altruism, which is very exploitable by the scrupulous.
Re: Super-Intelligent Humans Are Coming
#69I don't know if there is any statistical correlation or not, but (as the article alludes to) it does seem that super intelligent people are more prone to some kind of other deficiencies, and particularly social issues. Can anyone shed more light on whether this is true or not? Anecdotally, one of my best friends (extremely intelligent, Cum Laude engineering student) went "off the rails" a few years after graduating.…
Re: Super-Intelligent Humans Are Coming
#70I don't agree with the premise of the article. The idea that there are "better" versions of each intelligence-influencing allele - and that they simply linearly combine - seems ludicrous to me. It is equally plausible (and to my mind much more likely) that the many parameters influencing intelligence are linked in complex ways with no simple global optimum in sight.
I've read that many gifted children are utterly unfit for normal school. Some are even prone to killing themselves if not taken care of properly. Assuming we can indeed select for gifted embryos, and do so, the consequences are going to be… interesting.