No doubt you read about the mice that apparently had their intelligence boosted through genetic modification. Well, I suppose it was just a matter of time until the scientists got cooking on this one.
But does it mean that Mice have IQ?
I am very creeped out by the ramifications of this kind of technology, but I find it rather interesting how ho-hum people have gotten about this stuff. I swear the only reason that people got so worked up about the whole sheep-cloning story is that lots of people have seen The Boys from Brazil. I guess we need a movie about IQ enhanced Nazi Supermen to get people thinking about the impacts of this issue.
Bell Curve Argument
Ironically, I think one of the more prescient books on this issue would have to be The Bell Curve, which was so controversial a few years ago. While most critics focused on the one chapter devoted to a discussion of race and IQ, the rest of the book was devoted to showing the social stratification caused by IQ, among a purely Caucasian sample.
While the notion of G is rather controversial to say the least, perhaps the controversy is only momentary. The argument in the Bell Curve seemed to follow the following lines: There exists a measure of general intelligence (G). G is closely correlated with social success, lack of G is correlated with social failure. G is for the most part heritable Therefore, given a knowledge economy, there will emerge a genetic elite of high-IQ people that will replicate themselves in the upper strata of society.
With the coming of the genetic enhancement of human IQ, even the greatest of the critic of the Bell Curve is going to have to face the fact that their argument will have come to pass:
There exists a measure of general intelligence (G).
The sequence of genes that give rise to intelligence will be identified and will be subject to manipulation. Even if the idea of "multiple intelligence's" is correct, it would only complicate the matter of identifying the genes, not render it impossible.
G is closely correlated with social success, lack of G is correlated with social failure.
I'm sure Microsoft will be hiring the new batch of high-IQ workers
G is for the most part heritable
Even if it isn't, after one generation the genetically enhanced elite will want to modify their own children. Since they will have the easiest access to the resources to accomplish this, it's practically as good as being heritable.
The Custodial Society
Therefore, given a knowledge economy, there will emerge a genetic elite of high-IQ people that will replicate themselves in the upper strata of society. The poor who have no access to generic enhancement technologies will find it very difficult to get their children onto the right track in life. Already the crummy public education system makes this next to impossible for many today, tomorrow the genetic gap may very well shut the gates of social advancement for good. In the final chapter of the Bell Curve, the authors described their negative vision of the type of society that could come to pass. They termed it "the Custodial Society" and it featured a very paternalistic type of welfare system for the lower tiers of society that simply sought to keep them in line.
But the political implications of IQ enhancing technology are really going to be one big mess. First, I can certainly imagine that the government would seek to ban the use of IQ-enhancing genetic tinkering, and limit it only to the cure of genetic disorders. But other nations may not be so levelheaded, and may legalize these techniques and attract the jet-set crowd who may be willing to pay big bucks to give the best possible advantage to their children. If the elite pressure the government to liberalize the laws for access to the technology, it could then be legalized, but limited with those with the ability to pay for the procedure.
But then, certainly the middle class would want to get in on the action. After all, they do not want to see their children get left behind while the rich elite's give their children a leg up in the world. Certainly they would begin to demand access some sort of government subsidy for this kind of technology. I could certainly see the creation of a new middle class entitlement in this arena.
IQ Enhancement for the Poor
But the big question is whether or not this technology will be subsidized and distributed to the poor. Certainly there is a case to be made that it is better to give the children of the poor every advantage so they do not grow up to become a criminal or some kind of burden on society. Of course, there is a rather darker argument to be made that the maintenance of a permanent underclass will allow the dirty work to be done cheaply, as well as reduce the potential numbers of competitors for middle class children. After seeing the way in which the public schools have been allowed to systematically deteriorate, I'm not particularly optimistic that the gains of genetic enhancement technologies will be distributed down to the poor. It's cheaper to send a kid to Harvard than to keep him locked up in jail, but society has seemingly chosen the jail. I guess it's easier for the upper 51% of society to join forces against the rest, than it is for the lower 51% of society to join together.
Impact on Democracy
The other big problem is that these genetic enhancement technologies could very well erode the underpinning of democracy. How the genetic elite will reconcile themselves to live in a democracy where their vote counts equally with the lowliest prole is beyond me. At the moment, we have beliefs in the fundamental equality of people that provide a sound foundation for a strong mass democracy,. But when there is a definite genetic elite, such arguments may come to carry much less weight. After all...in a future with genetic enhancement of intelligence, those that are created will be superior - not equal ( or so some might come to argue). If the genetically enhances become the economic elite of society, something resembling our current campaign finance system may come to pass. The trappings of one-man one vote would remain, but the real power would lay in the hands in genetically enhanced donors that can afford to donate to campaigns. I would imagine that the use of popular referendums would be curbed under such a system.
Written by Mark Justman Copyright 1999 Posted 9/10/99 http://go.to/futureplex
