You're right this is survivorship bias, but I think it also illustrates that my premise is unfalsifiable. I'll try to restate it, keep in mind we are talking about evolution:
There must have been people throughout history who where of such high intelligence that it impeded their ability to procreate, while their circumstances didn't allow their exceptional abilities to be realized, and they died in obscurity. High profile, high intelligence historical figures cannot be an example of this because their circumstances allowed their intelligence to be realized.
In the best of circumstances, high intelligence can be exported from an individual and impact the entire culture, region, or even species (like a printing press). The meme can procreate without the individual procreating, and the impact of an individual like Leonardo da Vinci can permeate without him contributing DNA to the human experiment.
Here's my speculation: Maybe a gene that's too smart could possibly be self-defeating, and it won't be replicated.
Natural selection depends on environment, which changes all the time. A gene that is advantageous today might become fatal tomorrow so asking whether a gene is self defeating doesn't maker sense without specifying the environment. Floods, asteroids, droughts, fires, and so on are all random events that constantly change things up so only genes that are foundational to our biochemistry are immune to selective pressure - largely because most mutations in those genes are catastrophic or the genes are very redundant.
Humans have a complex social environment on top of everything else so whether a gene is useful or not might depend on which ideology is in power, the predominant religion of the day, or hygiene etiquette.
Pol Pot's purges come to mind, where he exterminated intellectuals, the educated, anyone wearing glasses, etc. I wouldn't be surprised if there were pre-industrial revolution tribes/city-states that were wiped out because they became "too smart" - i.e. focusing so much on education that they neglect their military.
There must have been people throughout history who where of such high intelligence that it impeded their ability to procreate, while their circumstances didn't allow their exceptional abilities to be realized, and they died in obscurity. High profile, high intelligence historical figures cannot be an example of this because their circumstances allowed their intelligence to be realized.
In the best of circumstances, high intelligence can be exported from an individual and impact the entire culture, region, or even species (like a printing press). The meme can procreate without the individual procreating, and the impact of an individual like Leonardo da Vinci can permeate without him contributing DNA to the human experiment.
Here's my speculation: Maybe a gene that's too smart could possibly be self-defeating, and it won't be replicated.