Opinions on eugenics? (new user, hi)
How do you guys feel about the topic of eugenics and its role in the advancement of the human species?
FTR I'm not talking about involuntary sterilization, mass murder, forced abortions or castrating people, I'm talking about the selective genetic removal of disabilities and diseases in children and the voluntary sterilization of those who realize their genetics aren't good for the gene pool (something akin to the ethical boundaries of the voluntary human extinction movement, except we, presumably, don't want humans to go extinct). By "genetics aren't good for the gene pool", I'm referring to those with low IQ and/or disabilities and/or heritable diseases or those that increase the chances of the children having it but aren't strictly heritable. I do not mean under any circumstances, those of religion or certain religion or lack thereof, or those of any sexuality or character. FTR I'm not a Nazi XD
Feel free to correct me on any of this, I'm not even sure if eugenics is the right phrase for what I discuss.
Feel free to correct me on any of this, I'm not even sure if eugenics is the right phrase for what I discuss.
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
I also advocate for education reform. The way most things are taught in most places is borderline negligent. Personally, if any more than 1% of the students aren't getting the best they can out of the school I think the school system is still failing, maybe that's just me.
@chironex & @glims
@glims If you are suggesting that I'm going to 'remove' them in the style of Breaking Bad or any mafia ever, no, I'm not proposing we do a holocaust-esque voluntary euthanasia of lots of, for lack of a better phrase, stupid people. "selective genetic removal" means genetic engineering of 'babies' (I am fully aware that they aren't babies, I've forgotten the term) in utero, I couldn't think of the term at the time (much like the 'babies' thing that just happened).
How is it "what has value and not based on my notions of value" [sic]? Surely we can all agree that diseases, stupid people and disabilities are all things we'd rather not have. Issues come when you attempt to define intelligence, but since it's voluntary, and I've asserted above that it would be temporary if it could be since genetic engineering is ultimately the way forward; it would be a voluntary and (preferably) reversible.
Well no, the family wouldn't decide anything. Emphasis on the voluntary part yet again.
I have to put a Nazi disclaimer because, as with anything related to the Nazis and as per Godwins law, as they did this (in a very idiotic manner that served no genetic benefit to anyone because of the politicized and racial nature of it), they will inevitably be brought up. I was stopping the "you're a Nazi" argument before it started.
Also, I wonder what traits eugenics would alter unintentionally. Perhaps the same factors that predispose someone towards being a felon also leads to something beneficial under the right environmental influence.
Finally, is a persons value determined by characteristics?
Im a relatively intelligent person but if I suffered anoxic brain injury resulting in decreased ability I'd still want to live. Sex is great. Food tastes fantastic. Swimming in the ocean is fun. Being stupid doesn't change this. I agree that we should strive towards bettering but I think we need to define what better is first. I mean do you think greater intelligence and happiness go together? I don't. Down syndrome folks tend to be pretty damn happy.
I agree that it's worse that lots of other things, I just think it should happen up until the point we've fixed the issue they were sterilized for (if that's even possible, like getting and reversing 'the snip' sterilization not 'I'm going to remove your ballsack and leave it in a ditch' sterilization).
"eventually they will "willingly" consent, because of the enormous pressure to conform placed on them by society" I'll give you that, but I don't think you can make voluntary any more voluntary, this applies to anything even mildly controversial that is voluntary. Unless you have any suggestions?
"Voluntary consent for a massive project like this is just a convenient way of making sure the people who want to implement it don't feel guilty about forcing people into participating." So I take it you disapprove?
I'm mean yes in the way tesla handled it with the not having kids due to his disease which HE chose to do not having some other body telling him. The moment you try and popularize something like this it will be abused. It can't work that way ever. This would be an individual choice.
And for criminals I hesitate on that because it is still a debate on whether they are born like that or raised to be. That said I know there is some evidence pointing to certain parts of the brain.
So that's all I would put into this.
In a sense, I'm clarifying my original opinion as we discuss to adapt to the downsides that you raise. Even though that isn't what I was originally thinking (because my original though had little nuance or detail), because I agree with it I add it to the opinion. That's not backpedalling to me because backpedalling is usually a situation where you say something terrible and are trying to convince someone you don't think the terrible thing even though you do because it sounds terrible. I'm adding more detail to the original thought, not going away from the original thought because I think it sounds bad.
"you did not stop the you sound like a nazi commentary" - Well, I can't do much about that considering I'm advocating eugenics and clarification doesn't seem to be helping.
Besides, I have no problem with "stupid" or people who are clinically mentally retarded having kids if they want to. I'd rather a kid grow up with "stupid" parents who love and support them than intelligent and genetically "desirable" parents who don't. I've seen what happens in the case of the latter and it rarely ends well.
"And for criminals I hesitate on that because it is still a debate" Well I'd like to see how the debate turns out but at this point the criminal thing isn't really relevant since no-one other than us 2 are addressing that, and it's not relevant to the point about eugenics that I'm trying to make.
"The problem with voluntary sterilization is that history has shown it becomes involuntary almost immediately" Well, this'll be fun
"It's too easy for those in power to justify their actions." Power abuse is a whole other topic but I get where you're going with this.
"Mental patients forcibly committed for life? Well, they're never getting out, might as well." There wouldn't be any point. That's just a waste of resources. Provided we aren't letting mental patients screw each other in the mental institutions they've been admitted to, when would this ever be necessary under the conditions you've provided.
"Prisoners? Well, they lost their right to freedom as soon as they committed a crime." That is not how committing crime works, or at least it shouldn't be.
"Besides, I have no problem with "stupid" or people who are clinically mentally retarded having kids if they want to. I'd rather a kid grow up with "stupid" parents who love and support them than intelligent and genetically "desirable" parents who don't." So people can't even have the choice to be voluntarily chemically sterilised by their doctors because you think that stupid people make better parents? That makes sense. /sarcasm