As much as I think the article's author means well. I am quite disturbed by what some of their suggestions represent.
Notably, the idea of "plucking" children that display intelligence from a young age and somehow aiding them in their education. Now I may be wrong, but this seems like we're metaphorically "harvesting" intelligence for the benefit of society.
The assumption being that society at the moment can't naturally do that, and we have to use state funding/power/force to make it happen. As with all such assumptions, it comes with a eery connotation that we have "very smart" scientists (you know, the ones we don't naturally reward in society") that have studied this, and they concluded that the best course forward for society is for them to "pick" a favorable feature in the populace and help it blossom.
Looking forward to see what sort of discussion this mini-rant/tangential-brain-musing sparks.
Notably, the idea of "plucking" children that display intelligence from a young age and somehow aiding them in their education. Now I may be wrong, but this seems like we're metaphorically "harvesting" intelligence for the benefit of society.
The assumption being that society at the moment can't naturally do that, and we have to use state funding/power/force to make it happen. As with all such assumptions, it comes with a eery connotation that we have "very smart" scientists (you know, the ones we don't naturally reward in society") that have studied this, and they concluded that the best course forward for society is for them to "pick" a favorable feature in the populace and help it blossom.
Looking forward to see what sort of discussion this mini-rant/tangential-brain-musing sparks.