Noah Smith Delineates Gene Editing for Intelligence from IQ Heritability Discussions

Economist and writer Noah Smith recently highlighted a critical distinction in the ongoing discourse surrounding human intelligence, stating in a tweet, > "How much smarter can we make people by modifying their genes?' Which is ALSO not the same question as the one that 'IQ heritability' debates are about." This clarification from Noah Smith 🐇🇺🇸🇺🇦🇹🇼 underscores the need to separate discussions about actively enhancing cognitive abilities through genetic intervention from those analyzing the genetic component of existing intelligence variations. The statement comes as advancements in biotechnology, particularly gene editing, continue to accelerate.

The prospect of genetically enhancing intelligence has moved from science fiction to a potential reality with breakthroughs like CRISPR technology. Smith has previously discussed the potential for "smart-ification technology" and the BGI project aimed at identifying genes for high intelligence. This involves directly altering an individual's genetic code to potentially increase cognitive capacity, a concept distinct from merely understanding inherited traits.

Conversely, the concept of IQ heritability refers to the proportion of variation in intelligence within a population that can be attributed to genetic factors. Research indicates that general intelligence heritability can be as high as 80% by adulthood, influencing outcomes like education and occupational status. However, these discussions focus on the genetic predispositions that contribute to natural variations in intelligence, not on deliberate genetic modifications to elevate cognitive levels beyond typical human norms.

The ethical implications of gene editing for enhancement are a significant concern, particularly regarding potential societal inequality. Experts, including Smith, warn that if such "smart-ification technology" is not broadly accessible, it could exacerbate existing disparities, creating a "genetic divide" between the enhanced and unenhanced. Harvard Law School's I. Glenn Cohen notes a "stark distinction" between gene editing for disease prevention and altering traits like intelligence, emphasizing the complex ethical spectrum involved.

Polygenic genome editing in human embryos, which could target multiple genes associated with complex traits like intelligence, is predicted to become feasible within decades. While offering potential benefits, this capability raises profound questions about the nature of human identity and the equitable distribution of advanced medical technologies. The ongoing debate necessitates careful consideration of both the scientific possibilities and the far-reaching societal consequences of genetic intelligence enhancement.