Well... So what? As long as people are happy, literate and nice to one another I think fluctuations in IQ are not a huge problem in themselves. It's only a prob

Well... So what? As long as people are happy, literate and nice to one another I think fluctuations in IQ are not a huge problem in themselves. It's only a problem if you think democracy the system can't be improved upon, because you have to improve people to improve the output of democracies. I've seen some things mentioned here that utterly baffle me, and confirm my bias that IQ is good for understanding but has little relation to wisdom or 'overstanding'. I am very worried about what will happen if we start doing rash things like mass removal of autistic embryos from the gene pool. I've seen it suggested too often, compared to the amount of people I imagine are actually deeply informed enough about both to speak on such things. It's strange to me that such an idea is not automatically considered risky, or obviously married with unintended consequences. On the surface of it, you might increase the median IQ by a few points. But you'd also miss out on the next Newton, Turing, Einstein, Kant, Cavendish, etc etc (I've plenty of other speculatives). There's no free lunch. Shaking the Tree of Life and hoping something tasty falls out sounds very unwise to me. As far as I'm concerned the major problem for humans is not their absolute IQ levels - it's arrogance relative to engineering capabilities. Lastly: if we ever make it through climate change and out the other side with powerful AGI, I guess high IQ won't be as central compared to EQ or creativity, except as something that roughly correlates with both. Edited for clarity.