"Darwin's work is the basis of modern biology. One technical achievement stemming from his insights is the ability for genetic manipulation. Where that will end we know not."

This is a prime example - whilst there are undoubtedly some negative aspects to flow from the biological sciences, they are overwhelmingly positive.

Medicines, nutrition, knowledge of the benefits of exercise - there would be a vast array of developments in those three categories alone.

Besides - I'd say the way we deal with problems in our future will be greatly affected by a few great minds who come up with ways to ameliorate their impacts.

While david f makes an interesting point, I'm afraid there's always going to be dissonance between innovation derived from highly intelligent individuals and the capacity of existing social and cultural systems to deal with them.

This is because 'intelligence' (however defined) is arguably the principal trait that distinguishes humans from other animals. In terms of adaptation, it has been intelligence that has given humans the edge over other species in our biocultural evolution.

Yes, virtually every great innovation has come with unanticipated costs, but so far humans have also displayed enough intelligence to create social frameworks to deal with them - more or less effectively. I agree with those who assert that the "social cost of great intelligence" is smaller than the social cost of ignorance.

“Darwin's work is the basis of modern biology. One technical achievement stemming from his insights is the ability for genetic manipulation. Where that will end we know not.”

I fully support TLTR’s response

Pandora lived in a “perfect” place until she opened the box.

Somehow, I think being challenged by the negatives of life is the test for being alive.

Pandora’s world might have been “perfect” but the “perfect” state is never changing, it can never get better.

It presents no challenges, no basis for growth, no opportunity to excel and no risk of failure and likely no need to exercise any freedom of choice

That all sounds so bleeding boring, death would be the only opportunity for a change from the perfection.

I prefer this imperfect world and the challenges and opportunities Darwin & co have offered us.

Ah, the irony. Let's use Darwin's basis of modern biology to genetically engineer society so that none of his brainy type are ever born again!

When I saw the heading I thought this was going to be about the personal social cost of great intelligence to brainy people. Nerds at school etc. Or the depression caused in those who have trouble relating to your average ACA watching lowest common denominator of society.

Humans are more than capable of bringing about species extinction and econological collapse with the most rudimentary technology. The stakes may be slightly higher now, but we are not worse off.

Ludwig wrote:

"Everything that Einstein, Newton, Darwin, da Vinci, etc have brought us would have been brought to us by others a very short time later. They just happened to get in first."

I almost agree. They would have been brought to us later. Whether a short time later or not is moot.

Note that my original post had the sentence: "The brains of those like Einstein, Newton and Darwin spawn those developments."

'The brains of those like' acknowledges that others would have done it.

Wallace had some of the same insights as Darwin. Leibniz thought of the calculus at roughly the same time as Newton.

I was commenting on the pace of these developments. I agree that they were inevitable. I merely contend that a slower pace would make them easier to deal with.

Ludwig also wrote:

"I don’t think there is much of a social cost attached to great intelligence. Rather, there is an enormous social cost attached to the lack of great intelligence."

It is the combination of decision makers lacking great intelligence or compassion combined with the tools given them by extremely intelligent individuals that is one problem. Bush armed with a spear can do limited damage. Bush with his finger on the nuclear (or as he pronounces it, nucular, trigger.) is dangerous.

However, all those of great intelligence do not become scientists and philosophers. Some turn their intelligence to other pursuits. Napoleon and Leon Trotsky come to mind. Both were unusually intelligent. Napoleon used his intelligence to make a trail of blood through Europe and around the Mediterranean. By destroying the flower of French manhood he may have been responsible for later French ineffectiveness against Germany. Trotsky might have been a great writer or contributed in other ways to society. Instead he was responsible in large part for bringing the bloody Lenin to power and keeping him there. Alexander the Great, Genghis Khan, Hitler and other historical monsters were probably also highly intelligent.

The foregoing intelligent individuals were responsible for enormous social costs.