>3) It is likely to be unnecesary. If they are really that smart, they will
>know more about morality than we do. The best course of action is simply
>start them off with a firm knowledge of human morality, without trying to
>prevent them from evolving their own (superior) versions as they learn.
Yeah right. We freely kill animals every day for our convenience. I'm not saying I have a moral objection to this, but why would a significantly higher intelligence be so interested in our survival except for its own convenience or curiosity. Perhaps such an intelligence might discover that it is to our own benefit that we should die (those humans are so messy, and live only to make their own lives harder... Some sort of euthenasia)
As you said above, they need ot have a firm knowledge and conviction of human morality (not for their sake, but for ours). Perhaps they should be the evolutionary winners, but damn it, I'm a human.