Althouse: "I am sure that during this century, people will discover how to modify both intelligence and instincts such as aggression."

October 14, 2018

"I am sure that during this century, people will discover how to modify both intelligence and instincts such as aggression."

"Laws will probably be passed against genetic engineering with humans. But some people won’t be able to resist the temptation to improve human characteristics, such as memory, resistance to disease and length of life.... Once such superhumans appear, there will be significant political problems with unimproved humans, who won’t be able to compete... Presumably, they will die out, or become unimportant. Instead, there will be a race of self-designing beings who are improving at an ever-increasing rate."

Wrote Stephen Hawking.

117 comments:

JackWayne said...: This is so over the top as to be un-believable. Not to mention a smell of chicken little.; 10/14/18, 9:49 AM
Mark said...: Star Trek was all over this 50 years ago with Khan and his band of genetically-enhanced supermen.; 10/14/18, 9:53 AM
Jaq said...: However, questions have been raised about whether parents would risk using such techniques for fear that the enhancements would have side-effects.

Humanzee comes to mind

"They inseminated a female chimpanzee with human semen from an undisclosed donor and claimed not only that pregnancy occurred but the pregnancy went full term and resulted in a live birth."

There is little reason to think such an experiment successfully took place - and plenty of reasons to believe it didn't - but having an otherwise respected researcher make such a statement is drawing attention to this old rumour once again.

https://www.sciencealert.com/scientist-claims-us-lab-engineered-humanzee-human-chimp-hybrid-100-years-ago-gallup-yerkes-oliver

It's funny that when somebody who is "otherwise respected" says something that nobody wants to believe, they simply decide that whatever he says is not true and move on.; 10/14/18, 9:57 AM
mesquito said...: ...and they will be insufferable.; 10/14/18, 9:58 AM
chickelit said...: “Presumably, they will die out, or become unimportant. Instead, there will be a race of self-designing beings who are improving at an ever-increasing rate."

“Die out” or be outright killed. When he uttered “super humans” can Untermenschen be far behind. Or is the term cloaked in terms like “unimproved”? There is nothing new here except the rates of change.

I’m a scientist by training but I never admired Stephen Hawking.; 10/14/18, 9:58 AM
The Crack Emcee said...: Or we kill them.; 10/14/18, 9:59 AM
Gahrie said...: Isn't it just as likely that the unimproved humans will kill the superhumans off as threats to their existence?; 10/14/18, 9:59 AM
Oso Negro said...: @ Tim in Vermont - the hooting and flinging of feces that compromises much of contemporary political discourse gives additional credence to the old rumors.; 10/14/18, 9:59 AM
Jaq said...: If some Bond villain does this, there are going to be a shit ton of rejects. We don't understand DNA, the best that we can do with it is "hack" it.; 10/14/18, 10:00 AM
Fernandinande said...: "people will discover how to modify both intelligence and instincts such as aggression."

Steve Hsu worked on that, and the Chinese continue to do so.

"Genomic Prediction: A Hypothetical (Embryo Selection), Part 2"

"Genomic prediction" is used predict phenotypes which depend on hundreds or thousands of genes, e.g. IQ, personality, height, susceptibility to various diseases, etc. Then the embryo with the best genes is selected. (Or perhaps the genes will be created with something like CRISPR).; 10/14/18, 10:00 AM
Jaq said...: They will likely be too smart to have kids.; 10/14/18, 10:01 AM
Jaq said...: That was the plot of Gattica, take the eggs and sperm of the parents, and out of the millions of combinations, take the best one.; 10/14/18, 10:02 AM
tcrosse said...: They will likely be too smart to have kids.

This was the set-up for Idiocracy.; 10/14/18, 10:04 AM
Mark said...: a race of self-designing beings who are improving at an ever-increasing rate

Except that, because they are a lie, they can only create their progeny in a laboratory and not naturally. Natural human reproduction will continue to outpace the fraudulent and artificial.; 10/14/18, 10:06 AM
chuck said...: It is estimated the 0.5% of the male population descends from Genghis Khan, similar large numbers from Charlemagne and Muhammad. Someday folks will be able to trace their heritage back to corporation and maybe a model number.; 10/14/18, 10:07 AM
rcocean said...: I guess Stephen wasn't one of those Super humans.

He's dead.; 10/14/18, 10:10 AM
rcocean said...: The Chinese are unhampered by bogus Western squishy attitudes toward genetics and are actively working on DNA manipulation.; 10/14/18, 10:11 AM
Michael K said...: Greg Cochran in "The 10,000 year explosion" has a long section on Ashkenazi Jews and how they were pressured to evolve by anti-Semitism in Europe, resulting in a higher IQ but also probably Tay Sachs disease as a consequence of rapid evolution.

It will be centuries before the consequences of such genetic engineering will be fully understood. It's the same argument about asexual reproduction. Why did evolution result in sexual reproduction if parthenogenesis was so easy ?; 10/14/18, 10:11 AM
rcocean said...: I thought the Hollywood elite were already superhuman.

They put out shitty product yet make $billions without any discernable effort.

Meanwhile, millions of idiots follow their every move and word on TV and in print.; 10/14/18, 10:14 AM
Jaq said...: Someday folks will be able to trace their heritage back to corporation and maybe a model number.

Not so sure if humans will stand for this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Dancer_sire_line

This was the set-up for Idiocracy.

The big problem with that movie is that the actual idiots watch CNN, not Fox News.; 10/14/18, 10:14 AM
Big Mike said...: 82 years until the end of this century. That’s a long time and anything can happen. Already we can see the likelihood that women who go through puberty as biological females are at a major disadvantage in athletic events to transgendered women who went through puberty as males.

I wonder what skin color these improved humans will have?

Of course Aldous Huxley predicted something along these lines in 1931. Anyone who’s read Brave New World has seen that concept before.; 10/14/18, 10:14 AM
Seeing Red said...: Always the perfectibility of the Soviet man. We know where that leads.; 10/14/18, 10:15 AM
traditionalguy said...: There is a god. The perfected man. Thanks for the heads up Hawking.; 10/14/18, 10:15 AM
Geoff Matthews said...: There is a book, Beggars In Spain, that runs with this idea.

If you take out longevity, and hide the fact that they were designed to be smarter, they just might survive. Otherwise, I think Crack has it right.; 10/14/18, 10:16 AM
Jaq said...: has a long section on Ashkenazi Jews and how they were pressured to evolve by anti-Semitism in Europe

The story I heard is that they took the smartest boy in the village, made him a rabbi, gave him a pretty wife and encouraged him to have lots of children.; 10/14/18, 10:16 AM
rcocean said...: Jews success is partly intelligence but also because Jews became traders/business/town and city dwellers hundreds of years before gentiles did. Most Gentiles were peasants and farmers till 1900, most Jews stopped doing that in 1500 AD.

It gave them a big head start when Cities became the place where the action was.

And being a persecuted minority gave them "Team Spirit". Another big advantage.; 10/14/18, 10:17 AM
rcocean said...: I'm watching CNN reliable sources without the sound on. Its just one attack on Trump after another.

Its unpaid DNC Propaganda. No POTUS has EVER been treated like this.; 10/14/18, 10:19 AM
Jersey Fled said...: Will Planned Parenthood evolve from killing perfectly good humans to genetic manipulation to improve the breed? Or will they just stick with killing everyone.; 10/14/18, 10:19 AM
Sebastian said...: "a race of self-designing beings"

Who says they're gonna be human?

I mean, semi-self-designing AI beings can already beat us at Go, so --; 10/14/18, 10:28 AM
tcrosse said...: We're marching to a faster pace.
Look out! Here comes the Master Race.; 10/14/18, 10:30 AM
Wince said...: Practically speaking, the Chinese communist party is the most likely to embrace this future.; 10/14/18, 10:30 AM
MeatPopscicle1234 said...: One thing is for certain... people's predictions about the future are almost always going to be wrong... We're supposed to be driving flying cars and living in colonies on mars by now... We may still get there eventually, but not like people thought...; 10/14/18, 10:31 AM
MeatPopscicle1234 said...: Oh, and GATTACA was a great movie... highly under-rated... A believable example of what a genetically enhanced society might actually look like...; 10/14/18, 10:33 AM
Amadeus 48 said...: I particularly look forward to our Godless global scientific community playing with aggression.

"Springtime for Hitler and Germany, Winter for Poland and France..."; 10/14/18, 10:35 AM
Bill Peschel said...: "Will Planned Parenthood evolve from killing perfectly good humans to genetic manipulation to improve the breed? Or will they just stick with killing everyone."

Depends on which is more profitable.; 10/14/18, 10:35 AM
Amadeus 48 said...: One thing's sure, our species-improvers wouldn't have wasted time with Stephen Hawking.; 10/14/18, 10:36 AM
Bob Boyd said...: "people will discover how to modify both intelligence and instincts such as aggression."

Does that mean there will be more chainsaw vs lawn mower fights or fewer?; 10/14/18, 10:40 AM
Amadeus 48 said...: And "scientific socialism." It's science! Just look how it improved men and women (not to mention others) in the Soviet Union. You aren't against science, are you? Science denier!

Remember, the moral arc of the universe is long, but it bends towards Trump. You can't fight the laws of history.; 10/14/18, 10:40 AM
Amadeus 48 said...: Just put me in charge. Everything will be fine. Trust me.; 10/14/18, 10:43 AM
tcrosse said...: "people will discover how to modify both intelligence and instincts such as aggression."

The Eloi are delicious, but there's not much meat on them when you clean them.; 10/14/18, 10:50 AM
MBunge said...: One of the basic problems (and there are SO MANY) with this line of thinking is that we don't even know what the hell we mean by "intelligence." I mean, look at how many people think Donald Trump is an idiot even though he's achieved more in his life than 90% of his critics put together. On the other hand, Hillary Clinton is supposedly a smart person and she lost out on the Presidency twice, once because she didn't understand how caucuses work and the other because she didn't understand how the Electoral College works.

Mike; 10/14/18, 10:52 AM
Mark said...: Of course Aldous Huxley predicted something along these lines in 1931. Anyone who’s read Brave New World has seen that concept before.

If we must go there -- and sure, let's -- the concept was raised thousands of years before that.

God knows well that when you eat [the fruit of the tree] your eyes will be opened and you will be like gods, who know* good and evil.”
The woman saw that the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eyes, and the tree was desirable for gaining wisdom. So she took some of its fruit and ate it; and she also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it.

The problem is -- attempts to make humans like gods, to make them like ubermensch supermen, promoting the progress and perfectibility of the human, in its hubris only leads to destruction.; 10/14/18, 10:53 AM
Greg Hlatky said...: The Heart of a Dog, by Mikhail Bulgakov

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heart_of_a_Dog; 10/14/18, 10:54 AM
chillblaine said...: The poorest among us are the richest in spirit. Let the mad scientists do what they will.; 10/14/18, 10:55 AM
Achilles said...: Humans with electronic implants and upgrades will surpass genetically engineered humans.

Humans with electronic augmentation will be our races only hope for survival in the long term.

The race will be between augmented humans and pure AI.; 10/14/18, 11:01 AM
Mark said...: "National Socialism is nothing but applied biology," said Deputy Party Leader Rudolph Hess in 1934.; 10/14/18, 11:02 AM
PhilD said...: When I read comnazi BS like this it always reminds me how prophetic Humanae Vitae was and is.
And incidentally how lost the West is without Christianity.; 10/14/18, 11:04 AM
Achilles said...: “a race of self-designing beings who are improving at an ever-increasing rate”

Biological improvement will be logarithmic, not exponential.

Electronic augmentation will be exponential just like it is now.

It will not be a contest.; 10/14/18, 11:05 AM
Michael K said...: Blogger rcocean said...
Jews success is partly intelligence but also because Jews became traders/business/town and city dwellers hundreds of years before gentiles did.

The argument in the book is that the Ashkenazis were the western European Jews and were not permitted any occupation but money lending and similar jobs. This required mental ability and they evolved over 500 years a higher IQ. The cost was Tay Sachs which was due to the evolutionary pressure on astrocytes. The rural Jews of eastern Europe did not have such pressure.

It's an interesting argument. The whole book is about evolution since the African exit.; 10/14/18, 11:12 AM
Mark said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 10/14/18, 11:12 AM
mockturtle said...: This kind of fantasy is hardly new. It has been the subject of many a novel for centuries.; 10/14/18, 11:15 AM
mockturtle said...: Crack proposes: Or we kill them.

Count me in! :-); 10/14/18, 11:17 AM
GatorNavy said...: Stephen Hawking is not wrong. Just because Western European culture may condemn genetic engineering, does not mean the rest of the world agrees with that conceit. Besides, if we are to exist and thrive in outer space, we would be forced to extensively modify the human genome.; 10/14/18, 11:18 AM
Matt Sablan said...: I mean, if we can start approaching how to do genetically replace extinct species, it might be worth thinking about this before it comes to a head.

We're already low-key genetically engineering by screening and aborting kids with downs and other birth defects, or in some cultures, simply aborting baby girls. So, there's not a huge mental leap to designer babies. There's a lot of technology we would need to improve and figure out before that's a complete reality, but it is a moral and ethical issue that is going to have to be addressed sooner than later.; 10/14/18, 11:21 AM
Howard said...: we are already electronically augmented. the althouse hive is an example. quite obviously it works great for the long con. is it no wonder Bannon linked Friendface with Cambridge Analytics; 10/14/18, 11:21 AM
Matt Sablan said...: "Oh, and GATTACA was a great movie... highly under-rated... A believable example of what a genetically enhanced society might actually look like..."

-- It always bothered me no one found it suspicious he vacuumed his keyboard.; 10/14/18, 11:23 AM
Howard said...: evolution is hyperbolic our time now is near the vertex; 10/14/18, 11:24 AM
Matt Sablan said...: "Just because Western European culture may condemn genetic engineering, does not mean the rest of the world agrees with that conceit."

-- But it doesn't, in theory. It just finds if we do it in a test tube or a lab that it is a bit more distasteful. Most countries, even in the West, are fine with parents choosing to abort a kid with certain features. If the choice were available to ensure your kid wouldn't have one of those features, but could in fact be better, smarter, healthier -- I have no doubt a lot of people would get with the program.; 10/14/18, 11:26 AM
mockturtle said...: Matthew Sabian muses: There's a lot of technology we would need to improve and figure out before that's a complete reality, but it is a moral and ethical issue that is going to have to be addressed sooner than later.

'Moral and ethical' are past consideration now.; 10/14/18, 11:26 AM
Yancey Ward said...: I am in Achilles' camp here- augmentation with hardware is likely to come first and advance more quickly. Mucking around in the genetic code trying to induce changes in intelligence and longevity is going to be tough nut to crack because of the insanely large numbers of interactions between genes.

Of course, you will eventually, given enough time, find augmentation and genetics working together to produce superior species. I would guess that a 1000 years from now, we will either be a completely new set of species, or we will all be the same as we are today, but technologically at the same level as 1200 A.D.; 10/14/18, 11:27 AM
Freeman Hunt said...: They probably wouldn't select the right things.; 10/14/18, 11:28 AM
Matt Sablan said...: "I would guess that a 1000 years from now, we will either be a completely new set of species, or we will all be the same as we are today, but technologically at the same level as 1200 A.D."

-- “I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.”; 10/14/18, 11:28 AM
mockturtle said...: These would be like pod people [Invasion of the Body Snatchers] and would have to be exterminated. The trick would be in finding their weak point. Everything/everybody has one.; 10/14/18, 11:32 AM
Mark said...: it is a moral and ethical issue that is going to have to be addressed sooner than later

It is a moral and ethical issue that has been addressed extensively in the past. And like most moral and ethical considerations, totally ignored in our progressive era.

The problem is that bioethics today exists to justify the unjustifiable, fully embracing as virtuous what was rejected yesterday as reprehensible.

As Richard John Neuhaus observed over 30 years ago, today's bioethics experts "produce evermore sophisticated rationalizations for turning the unthinkable into the routinely doable. The prohibited becomes the permissible becomes the expected. 'But that would be murder!' is an objection that loses its force the second time around." ("The War Against Reason," National Review, Dec. 18, 1987).

Practically the entirety of what was a few years ago called the "New Biology" was once universally seen as great evils, but are now celebrated fundamental rights, from frozen embryos to embryo-killing stem cell research to other embryo and fetal experimentation to attempted human cloning to organ harvesting to baby selling to the medicalized "aid in dying" of euthanasia, assisted suicide, and withholding of care, to eugenics to, of course, abortion, including abortifacient pills (falsely called emergency "contraception") and that species of death which nearly fully delivers the baby before jamming a pair of pointed scissors into the baby's skull and sucking her brains out to collapse the head, which, as gruesome as that is, still nevertheless leaves militant advocates for abortion.

All of these, and more, contribute to a culture of death -- death not only of the physical body, but death of conscience and death of the soul, and eventually death of society itself. "Never again" becomes "once again" becomes government even mandates that you be involved and pay for it.; 10/14/18, 11:34 AM
Jim Gust said...: Yes, Gattaca was a terrific movie exploring this subject. The genetically engineered were the "valids," the rest were "faith babies" or "invalid." Faith babies could not be sent to pre-school because of insurance regulations--too risky. They could not get advanced college degrees because their lifespan was too unpredictable to spend scarce resources on.

After a couple has a faith baby and encounter these problems, they decide their next child will be valid. The wife bridles at the extent of the questioning, at the choices she is being asked to make for her unborn child in the pre-conception interview. The doctor gives her a soothing sales job on how it will still be entirely the couple's genetic material, but it will be the best of their characteristics for their child. "Don't you want the best for your baby?"

Right there I knew that this was inevitable. Brilliant screenwriting by Andrew Niccol back in 1997, when genetic engineering was in infancy.; 10/14/18, 11:38 AM
mockturtle said...: Playing God, whether one believes in God or not, always backfires at some point and in some manner.; 10/14/18, 11:41 AM
mockturtle said...: The trick would be in finding their weak point. Everything/everybody has one.

To amend my own comment, the really tricky part would be detection.; 10/14/18, 11:44 AM
Matt Sablan said...: A sort of Voight-Kampff to find more human humans?; 10/14/18, 11:44 AM
Michael K said...: We're already low-key genetically engineering by screening and aborting kids with downs and other birth defects, or in some cultures, simply aborting baby girls.

Diabetes, type I is an example of evolution. Before 1920, the child diabetics died without reproducing. Now, the question is whether type I Diabetes is genetic or is it an autoimmune disease that is random?

It is still the subject of study.; 10/14/18, 11:55 AM
wildswan said...: A couple will be presented with 32 of their own "fertilized eggs". embryos that have been tested. There will be a printout accompanying them showing their future behavior based on their "polygenic risk score." Sixteen "are" higher than average risks for cardiovascular disease or schizophrenia. Strike them out. Ten are girls but the couple wants a boy because they already have a girl. Squash the girls. Six left. One is at risk for being short, another for being infertile (1 in 4 chance). Strike them out. The remaining four have equal risk scores in all areas but varied in IQ. IQ and myopia are associated, an association that has been increased by selective breeding since 2030 so the highest IQ boy has an elevated chance of being blind. Plus he has the greatest chance of Asperger's. And his head might have a funny shape. And he is at risk for being anti-social and killing his sister. But the couple chooses him because, overall, high IQ predicts socio-economic success. In their world everyone has an IQ of 130 except some deniers who are using the old way of forming a family. The deniers are tolerated because they are a useful control group. But generally speaking no one wants to be like them.

This is an example given in the book The Genome Factor by Dalton Conley of how couples might use the genetic knowledge they will have by 2080. Dalton Conley has published in the journal of the American eugenics society, Biodemography and Social Biology. The American national eugenics society is now known as The Society for Biodemography and Social Biology. It has taken down its website but it still exists and influences behavior genetics policy at NIH as can be seen from its journal articles. https://www.tandfonline.com/toc/hsbi20/current
This kind of eugenics - and it is eugenics - is considered to have a chance of being accepted in our society because couples make the choices freely.; 10/14/18, 12:04 PM
etbass said...: One of the most useless blog posts and set of comments I’ve wasted my time on.; 10/14/18, 12:05 PM
Matt Sablan said...: "One of the most useless blog posts and set of comments I’ve wasted my time on."

-- You should read more then.; 10/14/18, 12:09 PM
chuck said...: Engineer the new breed to have an immunity. Voila, ten billion coughs later and it's the new mxn. Roundup on a global scale and only the GMO survive.; 10/14/18, 12:12 PM
PhilD said...: "Presumably, they will die out, or become unimportant."

More presumably a new tyranny will see to it that the new 'Untermenschen' are exterminated for their own good.

Btw, the article and the remarks show that for progressives the term 'Human Rights', that is unalienable rights humans have because endowed to them by their creator, is a meaningless term.; 10/14/18, 12:14 PM
Christy said...: Lots of Hawking fanbois, many in the scientific community. I would expect Hawking was connected to many on the cutting edge of genetics. He'd heard all the plans.

I haven't kept track, do researchers still think two high IQ parents increase the chance of autism?

Gene therapy is already a normal aspect of American life. Is that the top of the slippery slope to designer kids?; 10/14/18, 1:15 PM
mockturtle said...: Is Brave New World really the kind of place you'd want to call home?; 10/14/18, 1:49 PM
Jaq said...: "faith babies" or "invalid."

I think that they call it "backyard bred" with horses.; 10/14/18, 2:10 PM
Jaq said...: s it no wonder Bannon linked Friendface with Cambridge Analytics

Yes, when Obama used the same data, and had Google looking at all of us for him, steering our searches, trying to crank Democrat turnout, it wasn't a problem of course. Only conservatives are ever being "conned."

Howard, you are not even trying any more. I am getting embarrassed for you. Wait, let me guess your next post: you are embarrassed for me? Right? Isn't that your shtick? To take words we use and mix them up into a meaningless salad and throw them back at us? You should leave the cringe comedy to Larry David.; 10/14/18, 2:14 PM
Fernandinande said...: The poorest among us are the richest in spirit.

Funny how almost everyone prefers money to a rich spirit. I sure do.

The race will be between augmented humans and pure AI.

Supposedly it's not much of a race because AI will develop faster, what with 20-some years per human generation, though perhaps that itself could be genetically modified.

Human intelligence in the near term would seem to be bounded by the size of the human brain, or the size of something of semi-human might care to be attached to, which is not a concern for AI.

"National Socialism is nothing but applied biology," said Deputy Party Leader Rudolph Hess in 1934.

So, was he correct or not? **

Apparently the quote is accurate, but what did Deputy Party Leader Rudolph Hess know about biology in 1934? Are we supposed to be "aghast!" and "outraged"!" about some aspect of genetics? If so, which aspect?

** Obviously Deputy Party Leader Rudolph Hess was incorrect about this aspect of National SOcialism, since socialism is a economic idea which has little or nothing to do with biology, and the Nazis didn't know jack shit about genetics in the first place.; 10/14/18, 2:26 PM
gadfly said...: "The Prime Directive is not just a set of rules. It is a philosophy, and a very correct one. History has proved again and again that whenever mankind interferes with a less developed civilization, no matter how well intentioned that interference may be, the results are invariably disastrous."

— Jean-Luc Picard,"Symbiosis" [and seconded by Stephen Hawking]; 10/14/18, 2:50 PM
Jaq said...: I have been brushing up on my French for a trip over there and have seen a lot of good sayings. One of them, about money: "money is the thing that gives other people the belief that one is happy."; 10/14/18, 2:52 PM
Jaq said...: So if a bunch of regular humans gather outside of the fortress of these supermen and begin to chant "You will not replace us!" will they become white supremacists?; 10/14/18, 2:58 PM
chillblaine said...: {{{ Funny how almost everyone prefers money to a rich spirit. I sure do. }}}

this clown nose on, clown nose off, type of argumentation, is why I avoid the comment sections, it's utterly dehumanizing, like talking to a confirmation bias-bot. seriously. I am out. BUT YOU DO YOU!; 10/14/18, 3:08 PM
mockturtle said...: Fernandistein claims: Funny how almost everyone prefers money to a rich spirit. I sure do.

You've probably never had a 'rich spirit' with which to compare.; 10/14/18, 3:19 PM
mtrobertslaw said...: Hawking should have stayed with ordinary black holes. But once he tumbled into political philosophy, a subject he knows nothing about, he began to be pulled inexorably into the Black Hole of Crackpots.; 10/14/18, 3:26 PM
Freeman Hunt said...: You have to respect evolution. Millions of years of selecting for things that be ng us to the present where we are surviving quite well. Start playing around too much with genes and who knows what destabilizations you will cause. Suddenly you have a society of beautiful, long-lived geniuses that die out for some reason you didn't foresee.; 10/14/18, 3:32 PM
traditionalguy said...: Methinks the Amazing Mr Hawking has not been prayed for by Pastor Brunson to be filled with the Holy Spirit of supernatural wisdom and thus left the creator of the heavens and earth out of his unified field theory.; 10/14/18, 3:35 PM
rehajm said...: I am sure that during this century, people will discover how to modify both intelligence and instincts such as aggression.

He seems to assume people will dial intelligence up and aggression down. I wonder why he believed that?; 10/14/18, 4:00 PM
mockturtle said...: He seems to assume people will dial intelligence up and aggression down. I wonder why he believed that?

It would seem that the combination of intelligence and aggression would be a winner, survival-wise. Of course, they would certainly want to diminish any aggressive traits in the 'non-valids'.; 10/14/18, 4:04 PM
Steven said...: Is Brave New World really the kind of place you'd want to call home?

Brave New World postulated the deliberate creation of intellectually stunted clones (the Deltas and Epsilons) to make a docile underclass of laborers by a tyrannical government. It is almost perfectly the opposite of Hawking's prediction that despite social opposition some people will go ahead and choose to use genetic engineering to make their own kids smarter.; 10/14/18, 4:08 PM
Big Mike said...: @Steven, do you imagine that a race of genetically-engineered “superhumans” will not need deltas and epsilons? Who will mow the superhumans’ lawns? Who will drive the garbage trucks? Robots can’t do everything. (Or can they?); 10/14/18, 4:18 PM
Steven said...: The genetically engineered were the "valids," the rest were "faith babies" or "invalid." Faith babies could not be sent to pre-school because of insurance regulations--too risky. They could not get advanced college degrees because their lifespan was too unpredictable to spend scarce resources on.

Wow, GATTACA was stupid. If you know and can test genes well enough to deliberately select for characteristics from the genes of any two parents, you know and can test genes well enough to know determine non-engineered person's characteristics. If you can select for lifespan, for example, you can also predict lifespan. Discrimination of the basis of how someone got their genes (engineering or faith) instead of the actual genes they have is idiocy.; 10/14/18, 4:19 PM
mockturtle said...: Steven, we already have a class of 'intellectually stunted clones'. They are called 'Progressives'.

But, seriously, you are picking at nits: There is no moral or ethical difference between what Huxley wrote about and what Hawking suggests.; 10/14/18, 4:21 PM
Jaq said...: Anybody who would prefer piles of money to contentment is a moron.; 10/14/18, 4:34 PM
Matt Sablan said...: Steven: The point of that in GATTACA is the dehumanization of faith babies/invalids. Yes, they could do genetic testing and figure it out, but the point is that the future is not a good place and the people running things want control, and if you act outside of that control, they will lash out at your children to ensure that you learn not to rebel again.; 10/14/18, 4:38 PM
Matt Sablan said...: (Now, whether REAL genetic engineers would do that, who knows. But the future of GATTACA was not a happy place.); 10/14/18, 4:38 PM
Steven said...: @Big Mike:

Does high intelligence somehow make someone incapable of mowing a lawn or driving a garbage truck? I mean, it's hardly like jobs are hugely sorted by IQ. The 90th percentile of janitors is smarter than the 10th percentile of doctors.

@Matthew Sablan

I mean, okay, that's a defense of the movie, but in that case, it's no more relevant to questions of genetic engineering than Orwell's 1984, another society where the future is not a good place and the people running things want control. I mean, a fictional society could arbitrarily discriminate against people with natural hair colors, but a portrayal of such a world doesn't actually say anything about the moral status of people dyeing their hair pink in the real world.; 10/14/18, 4:58 PM
Steven said...: There is no moral or ethical difference between what Huxley wrote about and what Hawking suggests.

There is no moral or ethical difference between deliberately inflicting fetal alcohol syndrome on millions so that they'll be docile workers, and parents choosing to have the genome of a blastocyst altered so the child will have a higher IQ and maybe some musical talent.

Ooooo-kay.; 10/14/18, 5:05 PM
Jaq said...: I would go so far as to say that piles of money and contentment are not much better than just contentment itself.; 10/14/18, 5:21 PM
n.n said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 10/14/18, 5:52 PM
n.n said...: A progression from one-Jew to one-child to selective-child to master race.; 10/14/18, 5:54 PM
Fernandinande said...: You've probably never had a 'rich spirit' with which to compare.

LOL. The saying "The poorest among us are the richest in spirit" is just laughable nonsense. Get real.; 10/14/18, 6:10 PM
Mr. Majestyk said...: Along the lines of what Freeman Hunt said @3:32: Beware unintended consequences.; 10/14/18, 6:27 PM
Mark said...: Hess was incorrect about this aspect of National SOcialism, since socialism is a economic idea

That's ignorance for you: The zeal for the master race, including laws enforcing racial hygiene -- to the extent of exterminating those who were considered diseases to the social body and the purity of German blood -- those were all about economics. I guess the Nazis were serious when they said, "Arbeit macht frei."; 10/14/18, 7:26 PM
Achilles said...: Freeman Hunt said...
You have to respect evolution. Millions of years of selecting for things that be ng us to the present where we are surviving quite well. Start playing around too much with genes and who knows what destabilizations you will cause. Suddenly you have a society of beautiful, long-lived geniuses that die out for some reason you didn't foresee.

Meh.

Same arguments are used against GMOs.

Those are wrong too.

It just wont matter.

By the time we are skilled enough with genetics to make people more intelligent electronically augmented humans will far surpass anything that can be accomplished with biological entities.

Additionally any child that is genetically engineered say in 10 years at the soonest will be so far behind the curve that by the time they reach maturity, at least 15 years after that, they wont be able to catch up without electronic augmentation.

In 10 years the divide between people who understand how things work and the people who don't things will appear to be magic to those who don't understand.

Already I can see how people that code in higher level languages like Python and Java and don't ever work with pointers or memory management are losing touch with things that happen at the machine level.; 10/14/18, 8:45 PM
cubanbob said...: First country that actually develops a way to consistently and with no apparent deleterious effects raise IQ to 140 or above will trigger the genetic arms race. Every country will do what it can that all of its newly born citizens will have an average IQ of 140. In addition those enhanced IQ kids will also have electronic augmentation ( if that is truly possible). What will a world be like where the average IQ is 140 not to mention electronic augmentation IQ? Will a super smart global population be on balance what we would consider morally better people than the current population or just the same but only brighter? I wonder what a Harrison Bergeron world where everyone is equal but with a genius level IQ would be like.; 10/14/18, 9:08 PM
Mark said...: The world doesn't need people with bigger brains. We need people with bigger hearts.; 10/14/18, 9:13 PM
mockturtle said...: The world doesn't need people with bigger brains. We need people with bigger hearts.

The world doesn't need more intelligence. It needs more wisdom.; 10/14/18, 10:04 PM
Achilles said...: cubanbob said...
First country that actually develops a way to consistently and with no apparent deleterious effects raise IQ to 140 or above will trigger the genetic arms race.

Cyborgs with direct neural interfaces will look down with amusement at humans with IQ's of 200.; 10/14/18, 11:33 PM
Narayanan said...: *unasked unanswered*
Planned Parenthood ...
Who is planning whose Parenthood?; 10/14/18, 11:50 PM
PhilD said...: "since socialism is a economic idea"

Socialism is a totalitarian atheistic philosophy, though there are different branches and none of them are 'pure'.

Capitalism is an economic idea(l), not a moral one (*) though there are people who want to make it into a totalitarian philosophy too. I see it more as a consequence of private property, the rule of law and history.

(*) I would say it is the best economic system there is but of itself amoral. That doesn't mean capitalism is bad, just incomplete.; 10/15/18, 12:58 AM
PM said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 10/15/18, 10:21 AM
Freeman Hunt said...: "Same arguments are used against GMOs."

It's a lot easier with a GMO. You only need it to be edible. The bar is a lot higher for a human being! (And hopefully does not include being edible at all.); 10/15/18, 10:57 AM
Skippy Tisdale said...: "Wrote Stephen Hawking."

Decades after Gene L. Coon and Carey Wilber wrote the Star Trek episode "Space Seed"; 10/15/18, 11:28 AM
gerry said...: Some decades ago, pre-frontal lobotomies were all the rage for treating violent dementia.; 10/15/18, 2:50 PM
Bilwick said...: Uh-oh. Bad news for "liberals." No aggressive force, no statism! What will they do with all that spare time if they can't initiate force against people whose liberty they want to limit?; 10/15/18, 3:09 PM
RigelDog said...: Wow, GATTACA was stupid. If you know and can test genes well enough to deliberately select for characteristics from the genes of any two parents, you know and can test genes well enough to know determine non-engineered person's characteristics. If you can select for lifespan, for example, you can also predict lifespan. Discrimination of the basis of how someone got their genes (engineering or faith) instead of the actual genes they have is idiocy.}}}}

Gattaca did deal explicitly with the testing of the non-engineered babies. The babies were tested immediately upon birth and the results used to categorize them. Presumably, if they happened to be free of undesirable characteristics, they would be tracked along with the Valids. However, the protagonist, Ethan Hawke, was discovered at birth to have a high probability of cardiac disease developing at an early-ish age, although he was otherwise a fine genetic specimen. Ethan Hawke's character is smart and ambitious and creative and doesn't want to be forced into a lifetime of flipping burgers when he truly has so much to offer. It's an excellent movie that continues to make me ponder Deep Thoughts.; 10/15/18, 3:57 PM