I did not say that they would be completely removed from society . They still exist in society but simply do not own material things and have very limited relationships , so I think they would still understand many issues . How would they be raised in society , yet not have any contact with family or friends ? you cannot have these both . Of course they would have to rely on some outside information but everyone does this . There is no way to know absolutely everything about everything . The key is being able to pick out the reliable information from the nonreliable . I fail to see how using evidenced based resources can be more corrupt than the current system . How would they be able to pick out reliable information from the unreliable ? they would not be around the problems , their education would be propagandized , they would have no contact with the people , and they wouldn ' t have to deal with the problems of an average person , so they wouldn ' t know . I don ' t really see your point here . Are you saying that people would vote on things they don ' t care about and that would somehow lead to issues ? These aren ' t mandatory things to vote on so if people didn ' t care they probably wouldn ' t vote would be my guess . The politicians wouldn ' t know what issues actually matter to the people . Its damn well important that politicians know that the people of our country care more about being fed and having clean water than legalizing gay marriage . I agree this would certainly be a challenge in some regards but we do have some ways to measure intelligence although they are not perfect . The key for intelligence is the capability to be able to understand new material effectively and critically think through it and I think that standardized testing combined with direct observation can certainly elicit these qualities . As for ethics I am not referring to their views on controversial topics but rather how they conduct themselves . As a simple example , these people could be presented with some ethical situation where they think no one is watching and their actions could be evaluated . How would you make sure that all of the material they were given to understand weren ' t of one political ideology ? Or that they were given material about several political ideologies and that only the political ideology held by the government currently is considered correct ? I fail to see how this is the case . All I said is that they are deemed to be somewhat intelligent and somewhat ethical to be given this option . They have a large variety of cultural , ethnic , socioeconomic differences that they lived in and experienced for an extended period of time before being given the option to go through with this . You said they would be given everything required to live , which gets rid of socioeconomic differences . you said they wouldn ' t be able to have family or any other type of relationship which gets rid of cultural and ethnic differences . I disagree . Not a single person alive has ever witnessed the United States setting up a new government . People have seen changes but never a complete overhaul . So literally no one knows that trying to set something new up would be worse . I could see how many would think that this type of change could be bad , because we tend to resist the idea of change . However , the current system is in a poor state , and I think its important to find ways to improve it . We have seen the US set up plenty of governments . The only time it has been successful was in Japan . In Iraq , Afghanistan , SK , South Vietnam , and the dozen of others all that happened is dictatorship after dictatorship .