Eugenics

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The inherited disease type arguments are kind of irrelevent in terms of this thought experiment. Even without eugenics we will (or could) get to the stage of being able to avoid all of them.


[/ QUOTE ]

How so?

[/ QUOTE ]
We will (or could) get to the stage of understanding genetics well enough so that we filter out, or correct for, any inherited disease.

chez

[/ QUOTE ]

But their point is that these diseases are closely tied to the increased intelligence because of the effect on the brain.

Even so, we're a looooong way from knowing genetics that well.

[/ QUOTE ]

Its sort of shocking what we don't know about human developmental biology. I mean, to be sure I am receiving a watered-down version of it in school, but the number of times our embryology professors use the phrase 'this is not known' or 'the mechanism is unclear' FAR outnumbers the times it is clearly elucidated. And my profs are smart guys!

[vhawk01]

Also, I wonder how many people on this thread who bandy about the 'bottom 50%' consider themselves in said group? Or their family members/loved ones? I know we are ignoring moral/ethical/political issue for now, but I just think its interesting to consider. My guess is no one on here would even consider being a member of the bottom half. Perhaps thats accurate, seems like a lot of intelligent people...but perhaps it isnt.

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
Also, I wonder how many people on this thread who bandy about the 'bottom 50%' consider themselves in said group? Or their family members/loved ones? I know we are ignoring moral/ethical/political issue for now, but I just think its interesting to consider. My guess is no one on here would even consider being a member of the bottom half. Perhaps thats accurate, seems like a lot of intelligent people...but perhaps it isnt.

[/ QUOTE ]
I suspect all (or very nearly all) of us SMPers are in the top 50%.

Gives you some idea of what the post-eugenic world would be like

chez

[vhawk01]

[img]/images/graemlins/shocked.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/crazy.gif[/img]

[madnak]

[ QUOTE ]
"There is a more politically palatable way to increase our collective I.Q.s, if that were our goal -- propaganda. What members of our species find sexually attractive is heavily influenced by social conditioning. If we made a concerted effort to link intelligence to desirability in the minds of the public"

Finally somebody with a really good idea.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm all for that! If government can get me laid, maybe I'll reconsider my politics.

[Mickey Brausch]

[ QUOTE ]
Ignoring ethics it seems highly unlikely that breeding for intelligence wouldn't result in cleverer people.
<font color="white">. </font>
Could be what happened with the ancient greeks and/or those jewish chaps. If you bring kids up in an intellectual [sic] environment then they are more likely to select for an intelligent mate.

[/ QUOTE ](I think you meant "intelligent environment" and not "intellectual".)

But that's not eugenics at all !

In fact, having an "intelligent environment" is a completely legitimate goal for society, although the concept is of course quite fuzzy.

As a side note, I doubt that an "intelligent environment" would necessarily make people more inclined to choose "intelligent mates". But, of course, that's not why we should strive for a more "intelligent" society. (By "intelligent", we could agree that we actually mean "civilised". It all becomes so much more clear, then. In a more "civilized" society, everybody is more "civilised", generally, so the intended "natural selection" is already happening.)

Mickey Brausch

[Mickey Brausch]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The inherited disease type arguments are kind of irrelevent in terms of this thought experiment. Even without eugenics we will (or could) get to the stage of being able to avoid all of them.


[/ QUOTE ]

How so?

[/ QUOTE ]
We will (or could) get to the stage of understanding genetics well enough so that we filter out, or correct for, any inherited disease.

chez

[/ QUOTE ]

But their point is that these diseases are closely tied to the increased intelligence because of the effect on the brain.

Even so, we're a looooong way from knowing genetics that well.

[/ QUOTE ]But let's f*ck around in the lab anyway.

That's what proponents of eugenics bring along.

Mickey Brausch

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Ignoring ethics it seems highly unlikely that breeding for intelligence wouldn't result in cleverer people.
<font color="white">. </font>
Could be what happened with the ancient greeks and/or those jewish chaps. If you bring kids up in an intellectual [sic] environment then they are more likely to select for an intelligent mate.

[/ QUOTE ](I think you meant "intelligent environment" and not "intellectual".)

But that's not eugenics at all !

In fact, having an "intelligent environment" is a completely legitimate goal for society, although the concept is of course quite fuzzy.

As a side note, I doubt that an "intelligent environment" would necessarily make people more inclined to choose "intelligent mates". But, of course, that's not why we should strive for a more "intelligent" society. (By "intelligent", we could agree that we actually mean "civilised". It all becomes so much more clear, then. In a more "civilized" society, everybody is more "civilised", generally, so the intended "natural selection" is already happening.)

Mickey Brausch

[/ QUOTE ]
I do mean intellectual. If the parents encourage their children to use their intellects to work, study, reflect, speculate on, ask and answer questions with regard to a variety of different ideas, then that encourages a level of discourse that reflects intellectual ability. One of the main things people will do as they grow up is seek out people who can carry out discourse at a similar level as they will have the same interests. Groups of the more intelligent will form and they will tend to select partners from that group. If their children are likely to be of high intelligence and remain in a culture where intellectualism is encouraged then they will bring their children up in the same way and so on. Pockets of extreemly intelligent children will emerge.

The ancient greeks would be an example of a relatively closed group that hosted an intellectual environment. Sounds a bit like jews and some asian culures as well.

Just a thought.

chez

[yukoncpa]

[ QUOTE ]
One of the main things people will do as they grow up is seek out people who can carry out discourse at a similar level as they will have the same interests. Groups of the more intelligent will form and they will tend to select partners from that group.

[/ QUOTE ]
But highly intelligent males will at some point in their life become successful, at which time, they will venture away from their group of intelligent females and seek out "hot chicks"

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
One of the main things people will do as they grow up is seek out people who can carry out discourse at a similar level as they will have the same interests. Groups of the more intelligent will form and they will tend to select partners from that group.

[/ QUOTE ]
But highly intelligent males will at some point in there life become successful, at which time, they will venture away from their group of intelligent females and seek out "hot chicks"

[/ QUOTE ]
for mistresses and fun maybe but wives? I'm no expert but nothing I've heard about these communities suggests they married hot tottie.

Being with a hot chick has an obvious upside but if they're dumb do you really want to spend your life with them. Sadly not much of an expert here either.

chez