Eugenics: A serious proposal to shape the future.

I think enhancing human beings is a good idea, not only at a biologically but technologically. We have quite a few problems to take care of before having such grand ideas though. And remember that there is always the risk that it will create another class type war in society. Not everyone would agree with this and in no time at all you would have the superior humans and just the plain old mundane ones at each others throats. Oh and we repeatedly see that with prosperity and wealth birth rates fall, you can't blame the poor needing more kids so they can work the farm, raise cattle or look after the parents when they are older in poor societies.

[edit on 24-2-2010 by Solomons]

reply to post by Dock9

Everything you cited has to do with societal and cultural control not genetics. A person with the best genetics can also get drunk and drugged up. They can also be trained to act like a complete idiot and commit crimes. You can also train people with very low IQ's to follow all your rules and not cause any problems. Your post doesn't make the case for eugenics.

Eugenics is interesting to me only from the standpoint of the evils the Nazi's perpetrated. Otherwise, this is likely my only post in this thread.

Any form of eugenics is bad, from my perspective. It amounts to weather modification, and will create unthought of effects.

If you believe humans to be only purely biological creatures, with no meaning or purpose, eugenics is logical. From that perspective, it is hard to argue otherwise.

However, if you believe we live this life for a purpose, for the sake of the experience, then eugenics is a concept that could negate this.

For example, if there are karmic lessons to be learned through child rearing, how many souls would be robbed of this opportunity.


This is besides the fact that, as already mentioned, we have no objective way to judge genetic superiority. We have not achieved that level of genetic mapping. We are unable to decipher the code in any predictive manner.

Quality thread.
Good OP and solid responses to what is a legitimate issue. :-)

It should be left to, well, professionals. People who have studied and been trained on proper child raising, and who have a sincere love for children. It should be job that the rest of society should pay for like we do garbage pickup and such.

No. It's our parents unique perspective on the world which helps make us individuals. Yes they screw up, hell mine did plenty, but learning from our parents mistakes and developing our own persona as a rebuttal is a better option IMO than a standard cookie cutter personality imposed by an institutionalized generic upbringing.

Not only should the right genes be chosen for the new and improved gene pool, one that no longer contains a 'shallow end'

Lets take a step back here and look at the broader picture. Don't get me wrong, i hear you, nobody wants their kids to have negative traits which lead to their suffering but;
What if the soul is immortal? what if living a life as an 'ugly/stupid/disabled/disadvantaged/etc' person is just one of many lives lived? ..and it gives the soul a lesson of empathy towards others less fortunate, which can be carried on through later lives lived?

The bottom line for me is, beauty is subjective. Humanity is beautiful in its diversity and we would be a lesser species for losing that.

Originally posted by BillfromCovina
All the problems you cite to argue for eugenics are actually caused by eugenics. The ruling top have set up a pyramidal structure that ensures they stay on top because they believe they are better.

Education is based on money instead of ensuring that all receive a high standard of education and training. The top class wants the best for their children and not competing with people they deem less than. A lack of education and training makes it harder to survive.

A lack of resources is encouraged as scarcity makes profit. The top controls how and what energy systems will be used. Low cost or free energy means more freedom for lower classes. The way we use resources is what causes pollution and this is controlled by the top. A lack of energy and resources make it harder to survive.

All wars are caused and encouraged by the people at the top. They then send the people at the bottom of the pyramid to kill each other off. They use brainwashing techniques to encourage and incite the lower classes. Crime is also controlled by the very top to ensure their control.

The world of me against you keeps everyone working on the pyramid trying to move up a step, even if you have to step on the next man's head. Eugenics is part of this system. It's time to move on and try a different approach.

I apologise that I may not add much to the topic but this is a masterpiece of a post. Thank you sir !

Eugenics is only a control tool disguised in progress and unselfish benevolence. As usual.
OP, you say don't endorse the Nazi version of eugenics but you are, safe the extermination of "sub humans".
Science can be as bad as religion. Extremists in both "believe" they know the truth and are fully confident they have to impose it by any necessary means to the ignorant people.

[edit on 24-2-2010 by Manouche]

Originally posted by BillfromCovina
reply to post by Dock9

 

Everything you cited has to do with societal and cultural control not genetics. A person with the best genetics can also get drunk and drugged up. They can also be trained to act like a complete idiot and commit crimes. You can also train people with very low IQ's to follow all your rules and not cause any problems. Your post doesn't make the case for eugenics.

Do you believe culling the masses will be conducted strictly in line with retention of 'superior genes' ? Or do you suspect it will be an onslaught initially, just to clear the decks a little ?

I'm all in favour of drastic culling. It's the closest this planet will come to 'paradise'

Millions of vegetables in aged and other care homes being spoon-fed and diapered. If their families cared one iota, they wouldn't be in care homes. They're there because of fear and guilt. No-one has the courage to put them down. Many are non-compos, the rest have such poor quality of life it's pointless keeping them alive. And the waste of resources is criminal

Millions more living out their final days in misery and poverty, poor health, just waiting for death to relieve them of the burden of their lives. If mass injections were on offer, they'd leap at the chance and their families would breathe a sigh of relief

Millions more born each day, unwanted accidents

And millions more born to parents with no discernible redeeming qualities, intellectually or physically, i.e., pathetically poor physical specimen, low-IQ, mindless, immoral slobs breeding more of same

It's clear humankind is an alien species, a plague, a virus, foisted on this planet, or here by accident. A highly destructive (and self-destructive) rapidly-multiplying plague

If humans were 'natural' to this planet, they would not pose a threat to it and would be self-limiting. Zebras aren't destroying the planet, nor lions or vultures. Without mankind's interference, everything would be in balance. And not only does rapidly-breeding mankind destroy as it grows and invades -- it also throws the natural world into chaos via the introduction of species such as rats, cats, domestic animals, etc.

The OP's definition of eugenics:

The study or belief in the possibility of improving the qualities of the human species especially by such means as discouraging reproduction by persons having genetic defects or presumed to have inheritable undesirable traits ... positive eugenics: encouraging reproduction by persons presumed to have inheritable desirable traits

Pretty broad, huh ?

Good people ... over there. Bad ones ... stand here before the firing squad

So, using your post as criteria, TPTB would have an exhausting task before them: ' Oh, he's dumb, but he's obedient' and 'Well, he's a genius but he favours the drink '

No. Let's face it, there are few who'd make the cut. So, at their most generous, TPTB (were they to decide to try for 'paradise') would retain, at most, the Top 5%

And again, let's be honest --- 5% is all they'd need, at most

That 5% would be the smartest and the physically superior with genes bearing no stain of inheritable disease, mentally or physically

The rest of us are dross. We reproduce mindlessly because we are mindless. We try to make a virtue of reproduction, ignoring the fact that dandelions and cockroaches also reproduce

TPTB don't even need to retain 5% of us. They have 'seed banks' already to grow a new, improved, human crop. And they're able to engineer those seeds to produce as many variations as they believe will most benefit a future species and the planet. A genetically-engineered species will, hopefully, be sterile: produced to order and programmed to expire at a certain age, like Thanksgiving turkeys --- only X-number of people alive at any one time and never exceeding the optimum number ... babies produced in laboratories and raised by the most suited and qualified

They'll look back at our era and regard us as we regard knuckle-dragging troglogytes

You are describing modern western societies. Other modern societies still care about the elders and don't "produce" single mothers. Our social organisation creates these side effects. This is not the regular behavior of human societies throughout history. You have a very narrow perspective that is restricting your perspective of a future.

Originally posted by Flighty

Humanity needs diversity and that means different genetic gene pools.
What might be perceived as a positive trait in 2010 could be rendered useless in 2050. With the natural order of things, there will be a gene pool of people who will get the benefit of that shift to what is now advantageous.

...Eugenics to me is the height of snobbery, self importance and conceit.
It's wanting traits YOU THINK are important to duplicate en masse.

Besides, it's all really just a ploy for TPTB to create a better SERF.

...So you might think Eugenics offers perfection but in the big picture on a very long timeline, it's actually quite limiting IMO.

In a nutshell.

...and don't forget. We really are in the middle of the 6th Mass Extinction. "Genetic diseases" that right now look like they should be culled from the gene pool may confer important adaptive traits - like sickle cell anemia gives immunity to malaria.

No way to know what mutations or traits will ensure our species' survival, in the long run.

reply to post by Dock9

You have not read my earlier posts as I do not believe in any culling or the practice of eugenics. You say that we are not natural but this is not true. As a species advances it would arrive at the same point as we are. If not us another species would advance to our current level on this earth. As intelligence increases the species would not be bound by the normal controls of evolution and nature. What would be the purpose? The purpose would be to spread out into the solar system and spread life.

reply to post by BillfromCovina

The purpose would be to spread out into the solar system and spread life.

Good grief !

I hope you're not serious


Can you imagine the destruction the human species would inflict on the solar or any other system, if it began to spread off-planet ?

Because it is possible, it is inevitable. It will happen, it is happening. And from what I see in the world today, it couldn't happen soon enough.

Good riddance to 90% of Humanity - worthless filler. Here's hoping they decide to delete the 'religion' gene for starters.

reply to post by Dock9

Not thinking outside of the box, shows your lack of intelligence. I believe it may be bad genetics. You can test your theory on yourself and lead by example. Maybe you can convince like minded people.