Does modern medicine allow for the survival of inferior and recessive genes in people? Is it paradoxical in the sense that as it saves one individual it allows that individual to pass on their weaker less resistant genes to others and make them weaker?
Nature has a way to survive only the fittest and healthiest most robust subjects of the highest adaptability and intelligence. Are we short circuiting that system with modern medicine? Are weakening humanity?
So you saw Gattaca in the opposite way it was intended
Anyway, joking aside, there is not much survival of the fit in the context of a modern industrial/agricultural way of life, at least not in the sense you might mean with animal models of evolution.
Most diseases of ‘weak genes’ don’t affect people until middle age or later (predisposition to heart disease, diabetes, cancer etc) and therefore are not ‘ironed out’ by ‘nature’ either. Most genetic afflictions that show themselves in childhood leave the person unable (or simply unselected) for mating so they’re not passed on strongly.
In other words i don’t think the ‘diluting’ effect you think might be at play is as strong as you may think - I’m sure it has a role, but not as strong.
Diseases being treated may allow weaker immune systems to ‘pass the test’ perhaps, lesser genetic faults might be treated and so also allow one to ‘pass the test’ too, but is that so bad, is that a powerful effect?
And I’d add that an Einstein may not have the best immune response to some particularly badly timed disease pandemic - how wasteful for such a gift to die over something like that. The environment that shapes evolution is ‘blind’ and ‘it’ may not value the traits we value.
Also, and this is something I’ve read, if you take 10 Einsteins and breed them the 10 Marie Curies then you don’t get all geniuses, generations later things tends to ‘normalize’ back to the middle of the distribution curve. Sure they may all be notably more intelligent than a hypothetical ‘control group’ but not as radically as the original ‘stock’, it’s supposed to work the other way too.
I’m sure we’ve noticed how the kids of great achievers are often good but not that good - i know there are more complex reasons at work but maybe ‘normalization’ is involved too.
Thats a good take on this. You presented some things i didn’t think of.