You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

DeVliegendeHollander comments on Compilation of currently existing project ideas to significantly impact the world - Less Wrong Discussion

15 Post author: diegocaleiro 08 March 2015 04:59AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (14)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: [deleted] 10 March 2015 02:35:58PM *  1 point [-]

Extend female fertility, postpone menopause etc. It is the technological solution to the social effects of The Pill, which gave the choice to women to not have kids (without resorting to celibacy), extending the possibility of the choice to have kids later into life, in the fities, sixties is IMHO the logical way to revert some of its effects (such as smart people not reproducing their genes enough). Do you want a higher IQ population, an eugenic effect without threating anyone's liberty? Help smart women have more kids by giving them more time to make this choice. For people worrying about human genes / IQ this is IMHO a very good idea.

Comment author: Lumifer 10 March 2015 05:04:38PM 3 points [-]

Why do you expect that extending the child-bearing age will eugenically improve IQ? In other words, why do you think that there will be more high-IQ old mothers than low-IQ old mothers?

Comment author: Vaniver 10 March 2015 05:48:46PM *  2 points [-]

Why do you expect that extending the child-bearing age will eugenically improve IQ? In other words, why do you think that there will be more high-IQ old mothers than low-IQ old mothers?

Part of that could be expecting current trends to continue--that is, higher IQ women are more likely to attempt to have children later in life, and because fertility is lower at higher ages, they end up having fewer children overall. If people stop having children because they have enough, rather than because they are biologically unable to have more, this should have at least a counter-dysgenic effect, though not necessarily a eugenic one.

Comment author: Lumifer 10 March 2015 06:01:52PM 4 points [-]

If people stop having children because they have enough, rather than because they are biologically unable to have more, this should have at least a counter-dysgenic effect

Unless high-IQ women stop because they had enough and low-IQ women stop because they are biologically unable to have any more -- in which case the effect will be dysgenic.

Comment author: [deleted] 10 March 2015 09:10:32PM -1 points [-]

I expect children have a diminishing marginal utility. Enough is enough, when all your free time and money is used up by them, even less intelligent people tend to stop. I think.

Comment author: Curiouskid 10 March 2015 09:19:20PM 0 points [-]

I expect that in vitro selection for IQ is an easier problem to solve and will have greater impact on the population's IQ.