Eugenics

[tame_deuces]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
dragonystic,

how about any trait having to be very widely accepted to be valued?

[/ QUOTE ]

still all sorts of problems would remain.

for one, lets say we all agreed that intelligence is good to select for. all we will in fact accomplish is changing the definitions for those we consider 'stupid' and 'smart.' Compared to our early ancestors, even the dumbest people today are relative genuises. If we bump up the overall intelligence through this selection process, there still will be bottom dwellers. They will just be smarter than our current bottom dwellers. And so groups of marginalized people will forever exist.

and still we would also have the problem of how desirable traits are selected for. there is no way around it, this would have to involve either a) stopping certain people from breeding or b) genetically altering the children born of 'undesirable' parents.

this alone is enough to disqualify eugenics as something a civilized society should consider.

[/ QUOTE ]

The world would be a much better place if I represented the bottom run of intelligence. I would love to be the marginalized underclass in such a world. Ability isn't relative.

[/ QUOTE ]

Too bad you couldn't have any kids then. I mean - it would worsen that society.

[willie24]

wow.

what is your goal? i understand the draw for nationalists who want to dominate the world with a super race, and also for people who want an excuse to give their own group more rights than another, but i don't understand how eugenics could "better the world." actually, i guess i don't understand the concept of bettering the world in general. if i'm unhappy, the world goes on unscathed. if the human race is exterminated, the world goes on. if earth explodes and life ceases to exist, it makes no difference to the world. the world can not be said to be "better" or "worse," because it has no emotion or want.

the same is true of "the human race." it can't be better or worse, because it isn't human and doesn't care.

when most people talk about improving the world, i think they probably mean - giving each individual (on average) a better chance to achieve his goals. for philosophical reasons, i personally think this effort is morally unimportant - but i can understand why someone might care about it, and, for the purposes of discussion, am willing to assume that it is a reasonable goal.

if your goal is to increase individual human happiness on average, how will eugenics help achieve that goal? in your answer, recall that life is governed by biology.