Scientists, ethicists debate search for genes for intelligence

The GLP aggregated and excerpted this blog/article to reflect the diversity of news, opinion and analysis.

Some people are taller than others. Others have wider hips, lighter hair, longer toes, or flatter feet. No one disputes that our genes help determine how we look. But what about intelligence — is it an inherited trait?

Scientists are now being called upon to consider whether it’s ethical to study the genetics of intelligence. Researchers should think about “limits we should place or steps we can take to be sure we don’t repeat historical errors,” such as forced sterilization of the “feeble-minded” in the early 20th century, said Mildred Solomon, president of the Hastings Center, a bioethics think tank.

In early December, the Hastings Center gathered a small group of scholars and ethicists in New York City to discuss the future of intelligence research. Earlier in the week, a more international gathering had debated the ethics of editing human genes — and both groups wondered whether some studies could lead so directly to dangerous applications that they shouldn’t even be done in the first place.

The most critical speaker at the December meeting was Dorothy Roberts, professor of law and sociology at the University of Pennsylvania. She disagreed with some behavioral geneticists’ claims that their work would help intellectually disadvantaged children, who she said would be better served simply by getting more resources. In fact, she said, any research that bolsters the hereditary concept of intelligence could actually hurt the disadvantaged, since it almost inevitably would be used to support “racist, classist, gendered notions of intelligence.”

Read full, original post: Are There Genes for Intelligence ‐ And Is It Racist to Ask?

Related Articles

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Does glyphosate—the world's most heavily-used herbicide—pose serious harm to humans? Is it carcinogenic? Those issues are of both legal and ...

Most Popular

ChatGPT-Image-Mar-10-2026-01_39_01-PM
Viewpoint—“Miracle molecule” debunked: Why acemannan supplements don’t work
ChatGPT-Image-Sep-17-2026-12_28_43-PM
Vitamin D, omega-3 fish oil and glucosamine supplements could cause brain damage 
Screenshot-2026-08-19-at-6.19.42-PM
Facts & Fallacies podcast: 'Regenerative farming'? RFK Jr.’s federal push romanticizes the past and risks food security
Screenshot-2026-08-12-at-11.31.46-AM
AI is helping develop new vaccines
ChatGPT-Image-Aug-28-2026-03_33_46-PM
Viewpoint: Bad science—Five bogus Trump administration claims about vaccines and autism
Screenshot-2026-09-14-at-4.31.14-PM
Viewpoint: What’s the likely impact when the EPA loosens rules limiting methane pollution from oil and gas wells?
ChatGPT-Image-Sep-9-2026-02_48_24-PM
Viewpoint: Trump-RFK Jr. report on “Gender Ideology & Left-wing Ideology’ targets LGBTQ community—and science
Screenshot-2026-09-10-at-12.20.19-PM
'Jet fuel didn't melt the steel': 9/11 conspiracy theories debunked
Screenshot-2026-09-20-at-9.03.54-AM
From Malaysia to the world: A pioneering science communicator reimagines global science communication for a digital age
ChatGPT-Image-Sep-13-2026-10_46_11-AM
“Hit the brakes”: Anthropic warns the race to superintelligence could spawn internet-seizing AI swarms—and empower authoritarians. Here’s how to stop it.
Screenshot-2026-09-15-at-11.04.54-AM
Viewpoint: Childhood deaths in dispute: Why the CDC vs Pennsylvania conflict over measles vaccines matters
glp menu logo outlined

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.