No one is going to impose mandatory treatments for stupidity.
A much more likely version is that at some point in the future, parents will be offered an “IQ enhancement package” for their potential kids. Do you accept? This is a much more interesting question.
It makes me sad to see non-iodized sea salt become trendy in the kinds of circles where vaccines are considered “unnatural” and kids get whooping cough.
I think there is a general issue here where “libertarianism” and “paternalism” come into conflict.
My preference in nearly all such cases is to default people into the thing that seems to honestly be the best policy, and let people opt out in a way that involves some larger or smaller trivial inconviences if they want to be contrarian for some reason.
Non-iodized sea salt is trendy everywhere, I blame partly the TV cooks using it in the iconic “grab a pinch”-fashion. I’m not sure sea salt should be mandatory iodized, but areas affected more by IQ loss probably eat processed food which is iodized anyway compared to the new age health crowd.
There are a lot of other interventions worthwhile alongside pushing iodized sea salt to ‘new health’ crowds, like breastfeeding and peaceful parenting. The latter two probably more important in certain areas.
You’re right, but gene editing companies might additionally lobby for pathologizing everything they can fix, in order to get the government or charities to make their services affordable for the less affluent.
It’s worth noting that any DNA enhancement package comes with artificial insemination. If parents get a child because their condom broke, they can’t use standard DNA enhancement.
Whether or not to abort children that are produced naturally will be a big issue even if a parent would prefer IQ enhancement.
No one is going to impose mandatory treatments for stupidity.
A much more likely version is that at some point in the future, parents will be offered an “IQ enhancement package” for their potential kids. Do you accept? This is a much more interesting question.
In some sense bans on lead are mandatory treatments for stupidity. The same goes for government-mandated addition of iodine to salt.
It makes me sad to see non-iodized sea salt become trendy in the kinds of circles where vaccines are considered “unnatural” and kids get whooping cough.
I think there is a general issue here where “libertarianism” and “paternalism” come into conflict.
My preference in nearly all such cases is to default people into the thing that seems to honestly be the best policy, and let people opt out in a way that involves some larger or smaller trivial inconviences if they want to be contrarian for some reason.
Non-iodized sea salt is trendy everywhere, I blame partly the TV cooks using it in the iconic “grab a pinch”-fashion. I’m not sure sea salt should be mandatory iodized, but areas affected more by IQ loss probably eat processed food which is iodized anyway compared to the new age health crowd.
There are a lot of other interventions worthwhile alongside pushing iodized sea salt to ‘new health’ crowds, like breastfeeding and peaceful parenting. The latter two probably more important in certain areas.
It’s okay, in Australia we have iodine in bread and used to be milk too.
You’re right, but gene editing companies might additionally lobby for pathologizing everything they can fix, in order to get the government or charities to make their services affordable for the less affluent.
It’s worth noting that any DNA enhancement package comes with artificial insemination. If parents get a child because their condom broke, they can’t use standard DNA enhancement.
Whether or not to abort children that are produced naturally will be a big issue even if a parent would prefer IQ enhancement.
That is a more approachable way. ..and still preserves the respect of others.