Ethical Dimensions of Optimizing Human Intelligence

ETHICAL DIMENSIONS OF OPTIMIZING HUMAN INTELLIGENCE VERLE E. HEADINGS* The volume ofwriting in recent years pertaining to the public stake in the characteristics of human intelligence, including its mean and distribution in populations, appears to have accomplished little more than defining a polarity of opinions. Throughout there has been virtually no examination of the value assumptions underlying these opinions. It seems quite clear that we must clarify moral values and realistic social goals with respect to whether and how we shall optimize human intelligence . In this paper I will develop those biological and social factors pertinent to the so-called intelligence or IQ debate which call for ethical definition. Hopefully this will provide a creative paradigm for thinking about the value and functions of intelligence. In industrialized societies there is explicit preference for high intelligence , and many processes ensure that this preference is defended and pursued. A rather general definition of intelligence will suffice for this discussion. The common instruments for quantifying cognitive skills are obviously not free of educational and cultural bias. They do, however, correlate in some measure with learning ability and problem-solving ability. Furthermore, when applied to any given population they define a spectrum of problem-solving abilities within a given population even though the instrument was not standardized in that population. For purposes of this discussion our definition of intelligence can be taken as being that which is reflected in scores on a variety of tests for cognitive skills. Our definition does not require that we have assessed intelligence comprehensively, nor that we quantify the relative contributions of genes and environment to the measured IQ. It suffices that we are observing a cognitive characteristic which is quantitatively variable within a defined population. Parenthetically, let us observe that intelligence has all the marks of *Division of Medical Genetics, Department of Pediatrics and Child Health, Howard University College of Medicine, Washington, D.C. 20059. Supported in part by grant no. 414 from the Maternal and Child Health Services, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. 30 I Verle E. Headings · Optimizing Human Intelligence being a multifactorial trait which is the sum of effects of multiple genes and environmental factors. Assuming that optimal intelligence at either an individual or population level is a valid human concern, then in the narrowest sense the methodology for optimizing intelligence can be assigned to two general categories: (1) providing environmental opportunity which allows optimum expression of the genetic potential created at the time of conception, and (2) fostering reproductive advantage for persons judged to be intellectually superior. The first, if evenly applied in a society, would require a corporate commitment to renewal of our existing social and educational practices. Such a commitment is morally defensible if it holds as sacred the worth and optimal intelligence ofeach individual irrespective of his/her genetic potential. The actions required by such commitment draw on the best of human qualities and skills. The second methodological category would require a stringent and selective breeding program akin to that employed by animal and plant breeders if it were to yield potentially directed change in intelligence. Even this would not assure that the change could be so chosen to be optimal in a rapidly changing environment [I]. Earlier, high intelligence was identified as a generally socially acclaimed status. By inference, therefore, many persons who do not achieve high intelligence rating are assigned second-rate status by teachers, employers, and other determiners of opportunity in a society. This in turn differentially limits expectations and resources for such persons. Second-rate status is readily apparent to any child in school who does not win the coveted top ranking in his/her class. The Pygmalion effect identified in the school classroom [2] operates at all stages of life, limiting the individual's perceived possibilities for development. If equal opportunity were seen to be a function of whether the individual is offered realistic opportunity to perform at his/her optimum intelligence and if a system of nonmonetary rewards were developed to reinforce such performance, then the present custom of rewarding individuals on the basis of competitive intellectual performance is inconsistent with the principle of equal opportunity. Herein lies the first ethical dimension: the foreclosure...