@Clark_Kent @PoisonDartPepe Ok, so your underlying argument is that man will not

@Clark_Kent@PoisonDartPepe

Ok, so your underlying argument is that man will not adapt to circumstances by adapting his moral intuition to reflect demands of the circumstances. And you’re somehow equating the current high returns for nerds with the problem of an underclass whose rate of learning is just too low and too costly for any of the work that can be done in an advanced society. In other words, the problem is the size of the underclass (unproductive classes), which in this period are different from past periods. Thirdly I think you are equating neoteny (domestication) with talents (eugenics). So I mean, I think what I hear is that I haven’t done a good enough (or simple enough) job explaining that set of causal axis for people unfamiiar with the science.
1. Neoteny (time to mature)
2. Ability (physical, emotional, intellectual)
3. Gender differences in ability and bias (dimorphic distribution)
4. Population Distribution of abilities (physical, emotional, intellectual) given the width of the std deviation of the population. (narrower is better, by pruning the bottom.)

History is pretty clear about the lord of the flies.
I am confident that man is amoral and will adapt his morality to circumstances – or at least enough of them will.
I don’t think ability is malleable, I think moral intuition is malleable.