Epigenetic proaction can be described as a way of steering evolution by influencing the cultural imprints that are stored in our brains. The question analysed in my target article is what exactly this means and whether it is possible. Can we adapt our societies to constructively interact with the ever-developing neuronal architecture of our brains? The issue of whether such interaction is desirable is also raised but not discussed in depth.
In order to decide whether an action should be pursued it would be wise to first attempt to understand its nature and implications. Regrettably, in his commentary to my article, Stephan Schleim fails to acknowledge the main concern of my paper, namely the scientific issue, moving instead to the normative question via some less relevant detours. The commentary therefore becomes misleading. Rather than engaging with the scientific points I make, Schleim takes as a starting point a flawed understanding of epigenetic proaction and tries to show how undesirable it would be. The arguments have little to do with the article on which he purports to comment.