Is It Ethical To Hand-Pick Your Child’s Genes? - Dr Jonathan Anomaly

Is It Ethical To Hand-Pick Your Child’s Genes? - Dr Jonathan Anomaly

Modern WisdomAug 10, 20241h 47m

Chris Williamson (host), Dr Jonathan Anomaly (guest), Narrator

Historical stigma around IQ, eugenics, and post–World War II normsValidity, limits, and social correlates of IQ and general intelligence (g)Polygenic embryo screening and selection for health and cognitive traitsEthical debates: disease prevention vs enhancement, consent, fairness, and envyGenetic load, mutation accumulation, and the case for "voluntary eugenics"Social and political implications: inequality, sex ratios, religiosity, ideologyMoral enhancement, cooperation, and the interaction of IQ with pro-social behavior

In this episode of Modern Wisdom, featuring Chris Williamson and Dr Jonathan Anomaly, Is It Ethical To Hand-Pick Your Child’s Genes? - Dr Jonathan Anomaly explores designing Future Minds: Ethics, IQ, and Embryo Gene Selection Debated Chris Williamson and Dr. Jonathan Anomaly discuss the science, politics, and ethics of intelligence, genetics, and emerging reproductive technologies. They trace why IQ became taboo after World War II, despite strong evidence that it is heritable and predictive of life outcomes like education, income, and crime. The conversation then explores polygenic embryo selection for health, intelligence, and personality, weighing potential benefits against risks like arms races, inequality, and value-laden trait choices. They conclude that genetic selection is inevitable, likely to be normalized and subsidized, and that denying genetic reality may ultimately harm the very groups egalitarian ideologies aim to protect.

Designing Future Minds: Ethics, IQ, and Embryo Gene Selection Debated

Chris Williamson and Dr. Jonathan Anomaly discuss the science, politics, and ethics of intelligence, genetics, and emerging reproductive technologies. They trace why IQ became taboo after World War II, despite strong evidence that it is heritable and predictive of life outcomes like education, income, and crime. The conversation then explores polygenic embryo selection for health, intelligence, and personality, weighing potential benefits against risks like arms races, inequality, and value-laden trait choices. They conclude that genetic selection is inevitable, likely to be normalized and subsidized, and that denying genetic reality may ultimately harm the very groups egalitarian ideologies aim to protect.

Key Takeaways

IQ is both real and politically loaded, but ignoring it is dangerous.

Modern IQ tests are reasonably valid and predictive (education, income, marital stability, crime) and strongly heritable, yet post-war revulsion toward eugenics led elites to stigmatize any genetic explanation of group or individual differences. ...

Get the full analysis with uListen

Polygenic embryo selection for health is already here and intelligence is next.

Current IVF clinics can screen embryos for polygenic risks like diabetes, heart disease, and schizophrenia, and at least one company Anomaly advises can select for higher predicted cognitive ability, with 20–25 IQ point spreads possible across a batch of embryos. ...

Get the full analysis with uListen

The disease–enhancement line feels intuitive but is conceptually weak.

People draw a moral line between preventing disease (e. ...

Get the full analysis with uListen

Modern medicine increases genetic load, creating a case for voluntary genetic selection.

By keeping more people alive and reproductive despite serious genetic disadvantages (poor eyesight, childhood cancers, monogenic diseases), advanced healthcare allows deleterious mutations to accumulate. ...

Get the full analysis with uListen

Genetic selection can create collective goods but also arms races.

Selecting for intelligence or lower disease burden likely yields positive externalities—more innovation, productivity, and cooperation over longer time horizons. ...

Get the full analysis with uListen

Moral traits and cooperation have genetic components and could be targets of selection.

Personality dimensions like conscientiousness, openness, and affective empathy are moderately heritable and strongly shape pro-social behavior. ...

Get the full analysis with uListen

Public opinion supports genetic screening for disease but is wary of cosmetic and social traits.

Surveys (e. ...

Get the full analysis with uListen

Notable Quotes

“Blank slatists in the streets, hereditarian between the sheets.”

Jonathan Anomaly

“If you leave a thing alone, you leave it to a torrent of change… If you want the old white post, you must have a new white post.”

Jonathan Anomaly (quoting and extending G.K. Chesterton

“There are actually moral risks to denying IQ and its importance in everyday life, because if you don’t understand that this is a real phenomenon… you’re going to create social policies that basically say, ‘Let’s punish the high IQ people and reward the others.’”

Jonathan Anomaly

“We’re already eugenicists in some form because why did you pick your partner? … We’ve been there since the beginning of time since reproduction through sex started.”

Chris Williamson

“The ultimate collective action problem across societies, across countries, and across generations is genetic selection. What happens when everyone has the ability to select embryos or edit those embryos?”

Jonathan Anomaly

Questions Answered in This Episode

If embryo selection for intelligence and health becomes cheap and widespread, how should societies handle the potential widening gap between families who adopt it early and those who refuse or can’t access it?

Chris Williamson and Dr. ...

Get the full analysis with uListen AI

Where, if anywhere, should regulators draw hard lines between acceptable disease prevention and impermissible enhancement when parents choose traits for future children?

Get the full analysis with uListen AI

How can we minimize status-driven arms races (e.g., for height, beauty, or elite credentials) while still allowing parents to improve their children’s genetic prospects?

Get the full analysis with uListen AI

Should governments subsidize IVF and polygenic screening as a public good (e.g., to reduce disease burden and mutation load), or would that entangle the state too deeply in reproductive choices?

Get the full analysis with uListen AI

What safeguards, if any, are needed to prevent political, religious, or ideological groups from using genetic selection to entrench their own traits—such as stronger religiosity or partisan leanings—over generations?

Get the full analysis with uListen AI

Transcript Preview

Chris Williamson

Why do people really dislike conversations about IQ?

Dr Jonathan Anomaly

I think it's pretty straightforward, and that is norms that followed the end of the Second World War. So what ends up happening in the 1920s and '30s is IQ tests were already pretty decent by then. They did have some bias back, back in the day when they were invented, but they were relatively good at gauging cognitive ability. But what ended, what ended up happening is some people misused IQ to justify, for example, uh, restrictive immigration policies in the United States first. And then, you know, after World War II, actually interestingly, a quick divergence here, Hitler had Jews and, and non-Jews, Gentiles cognitively tested, and he found that Jews consistently scored higher on IQ tests than Germans did, and he banned IQ tests, um, in Germany.

Chris Williamson

Wow.

Dr Jonathan Anomaly

So it's not-

Chris Williamson

So actually being anti-IQ is a Nazi policy.

Dr Jonathan Anomaly

Is pro-Nazi, that's right, right, right.

Chris Williamson

(laughs)

Dr Jonathan Anomaly

So... But, but at least according to the lore, and, and some of this lore is true, some of the, some of the hardcore coercive eugenicists in the 1920s and '30s did notice cognitive differences between populations. And even though Hitler found the reverse between, you know, Jews and, and Gentiles, what, than what he wanted to find, it became stigmatized after the Second World War because at least some people, even if not Hitler, were using cognitive differences to justify restrictive immigration policies and also potentially supremacy over other groups. So you can think of the British Empire and, you know, why should the French have colonies? Why should the British have colonies? Well, we're smarter, we're better than them, that sort of thing. I- I'm not French or, or British by the way, but, you know, there's at least the sense that they could be misused for these things, and, and, and sometimes they were. And so I think what happened after the Second World War is not just that IQ was shunned and the genetics of IQ, but really genetic explanations for any group differences and even for individual differences, because it became part of a dangerous package whereby you could use this research to mistreat groups of people.

Chris Williamson

Can you just explain, uh, group differences and individual differences, what that means in a genetic context, how it's different?

Dr Jonathan Anomaly

Sure. I mean, look, we all understand first of all what intelligence is, broadly speaking. I should just say that, um, intelligence is roughly the ability to creatively solve problems. It's not just memory, it's not just recall, it's the ability to kind of draw conclusions from evidence and so on. And we recognize it in, in dogs, we recognize it in cuttlefish. Cuttlefish are some of the brightest animals on Earth, which is why I don't eat them, by the way. (laughs) Um, that's a kind of species of octopus. And so we, we all know that there are individual differences in intelligence. We see it in our dogs, we see it in cuttlefish, we see it in people. And obviously the genetics of this is just such that, you know, there, there are genetic explanations for why people differ in height, in weight, in muscle mass, and in intelligence. And that's not to say that the environment doesn't matter, that you can't get better, for example, at taking IQ tests or solving cognitive problems, but there are pretty strict genetic limits on that, right? You're not gonna train your way into becoming Einstein. And so that, that's individual ins-, uh, differences in IQ. Um, there's clearly a mostly genetic basis, it's true across the animal kingdom, and it's probably gonna be true across groups too, um, whether we wanna talk about that or not. I mean, it s- it seems obvious, just like height, there are height differences, there are speed differences. Right now we're all watching the Olympics, and y- you do see patterns, right? Ethiopians tend to be really good at long-distance running and West Africans tend to be really good at short-distance running. And so there are gonna be these differences between individuals and groups, and genes are gonna have something to do with it.

Install uListen to search the full transcript and get AI-powered insights

Get Full Transcript

Get more from every podcast

AI summaries, searchable transcripts, and fact-checking. Free forever.

Add to Chrome