From: "Trent W. Buck" <trentbuck@gmail.com>

Andrew McGlashan wrote:

...

On 24/04/2014 4:57 PM, Peter Ross wrote:

...

From: "Jason White" <jason@jasonjgw.net>

...

I think the idea for human enhancement of intelligence, though, would be to increase IQ biologically if appropriate means (genetic selection of children,gene therapy, drugs or whatever) were available.

I do not think we have appropriate social mechanisms to do this reasonably well. The selection/improvement criteria would be hijacked pretty quickly to clone an army of "desired subjects".

Anyway, I know a few people who are not "fully normed". They are among the most fascinating people I met.

I just spent a weekend with a "borrowed" child camping with us. He is very difficult, according to many.

I ignored half of the advice and we all had a pretty good weekend with him!

In your "grand plan" he would not exist, maybe..

What a great story Peter, thank you.

I'm also against /master/ race science too

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law

Eugenics does not necessarily mean "I am a Nazi",

I agree with that, and I do not suspect this here on the list. Sorry if it sounded that way. I remember a song line (translated into English): "How crazy is the man who thinks he is normal";-) Just pick randomly a few artists, scientists or other people of public interests and look up their life. There is a lot "craziness" and behaviour "we do not approve". To a certain extend I expect a "normalised" society to be a bureaucratic one and not a creative one. Genetic selection criteria or modification will amplify this problem, I suspect. Regards Peter