"One of my concerns about we humans is that our cultural achievements may now be working AGAINST natural selection. The members of our population that are the highest achievers are blessed with robust cognitive capabilities and reproduce at very low rates. In contrast, the lowest achievers, that may tend to be less endowed with the highest levels of cognition, reproduce at fairly high rates. This trend, which is a reversal of fitness selection, has only been in evidence for about two generations; not long enough to have had much effect. Does this pose a potential problem? "

I disagree with that contention. The difference is between a genetic predisposition to intelligence and a culturally defined desire for learning. Or even the potential for persuing a desire for learning. In our society, the genetic variation of intelligence is minimal compared to the social and economic factors dictating intelligence levels. If you grow up in poverty, even if you are just as capable of being a quantum theorist as the best, it may never happen becuase life conditions are not conducive to that. Any random sample of people will show just as many 'dumb' rich people as 'dumb' poor people who procreate more. The difference is cultural, not genetic, and is not related to biological selection

Matus