EUGENICS- The applied science or the biosocial movement that advocates use of practices aimed at improving the genetic composition of a population
basically using science to weed out undesirable genetic traits and possibly implant those that are. ie. making your child blond haired and blue eyed. ...or weeding out types of dwarfism
What are your opinions of the practice of eugenics? Do you approve of it? disapprove of it? Everytime I've seen this subject pop up people cite Hitler and the extreme ways he went about doing things... If that had never happened would you think differently?
The primary issue with Eugenics is that the application demands either limiting reproduction to a select bunch of people or, in a case like with Hitler, killing off those considered inferior. This begs the question of determining the qualifications for who to choose.
Personally, I disapprove of it not so much for the idea of eugenics, but the implementation. As I said earlier, who would we choose to keep? Probably the best example I can think of is Brave New World. I mean, we could end up having a few people who basically dictate the lives of hundreds of thousands, something that I find unethical.
I say we start off by weeding out those with genetic diseases and work our way up from there. If we can eliminate the parts we KNOW are bad then that leaves plenty of time later for arguing over which parts we THINK are bad and should be weeded out.
Eugenicists don't understand that Social Darwinism is a much more objective and way of accomplishing their end.
Note that I am not saying that I favor either Social Darwinism or Eugenics, but I am saying that Social Darwinism is a better choice for improving the "gene pool" or whatever, as it allows those "most fit to survive" to survive, instead of putting the responsibility in the hands of bureaucrats, who may have their own prejudices.
A more basic question than Eugenics as a whole - Are there things such as "happiness" or "intelligence" that should be increased without limit? Or is there an Aristotelian Mean to these?
basically using science to weed out undesirable genetic traits and possibly implant those that are. ie. making your child blond haired and blue eyed. ...or weeding out types of dwarfism
Realistically there is no such thing as genettic inferiority or superiority. You can aim for genes that tend towards certain outcomes, but even then you are playing with chance; those same genes coud lead to a disadvantage based on circumstances. That's the fundamental problem with eugenics.
Take for example blond haired people with blue eyes. These aryans have a much higher likelihood of getting forms of skin cancer.
If that had never happened would you think differently?
Even discounting the holocaust, darwinism and other forms of psuedo science have been used by the sociopathic elite to justify terrible evils on the grounds of racial superiority. We are still feeling the effects of European colonialism to this day, and it was in no small part justified by these theories.
i think a different application would be excising the coding material for a particular unwanted gene belonging to a gamete and replacing it with the more desirable version... in that way... everyone reproduces
or... I would suggest, for all of those interested, that you go and watch the movie GATTACA (I think that's how u spell it). In that movie they talk about 2 brothers. The first is conceived through natural means. His DNA is analyzed and he's given something like a 90% chance of having heart complications as an adult... he's given a time span of something to the effect of 25 years to live (or less). His younger brother was created with the aid of science. He was made from the parent's DNA. and they describe him to the parents as "he's not anything more than you... he's just the best of you." he's a perfectly healthy boy. In this case it was used to circumvent health complications.... but what if it wasn't...? what if it was just common practice to make your kids faster, stronger, smarter just for the sake of doing it? like they would've just been every day average individuals (no extreme health complications) without it, but using it just to make them "super human"
i would think eugenics through means of natural conception of children would be outdated now. I'm referring to actually paying for specific traits. In the movie, there was a pianist who played a piece that was only possible if the player had 12 fingers. His parents had the gene for a functional form of polydactyly just so he would be a master pianist.
i hope i didn't confuse my readers here but... i don't mean it has to be "the best of you"...I'm also adding in the possibility of adding in genes that neither parent has
the movie is a great watch... even if its just for the sake of watching it. and also for the added thinking that it promotes
I really do not like the idea of making everyone the same through eugenics or anything else. The thing that makes people human is the fact that they're different from another person. Perfection isn't something a human should be. There will always be imperfections in a human, no matter how hard we try to eradicate the imperfections.
Ugh. Ugh. Ugh. Eugenics and social Darwinism are what (almost) directly led to the Holocaust. Never never never should we attempt to play God and control the population. It will just lead to hugely morally and ethically wrong situations
i never said anything about killing off those that already have ailments... I was talking about fixing them at the EGG or SPERM stage so that child would not be affected.
In that way you still have people.... just disease free superhuman people
now... as for the comment about aryans being more sensitive to sunlight and cancer... not if said aryan has been given skin with a darker range of pigmentation and can get a tan easier... then its just as easy to get cancer for them as it is anyone else
Again, I find that too much like acting as a God like figure. Also, I'd think that without the measures of disease etc there wouldn't be natural population controls. The ecosystem works for a reason and if you also one thing, who knows what the consequences would be.
the ecosystem comment is true... but I think we passed that natural limitation a long time ago. what i see happening is that diseases that should be fatal under normal circumstances are usually curbed off somehow w/ technology already... ie Mr. Hawkins.... of course there are people who die but i think more and more we're just going to have a growing population of chronically afflicted people with too much money to just let themselves or their children die w/o a fight... so instead of dying young as a child they just suffer their affliction for the length of a normal lifespan. i don't think it would be a bad thing to give them a normal life alongside the normal lifespan they'll end up having anyway.
I've seen the comment made that these people with sicknesses help make the others that are perfectly normal more grateful for their own lives... I would like for those interested to youtube PROGERIA... i'm not trying to step on any toes here... but I think the whole agrument at the top of this paragraph is horse crap. i think those that have already suffered and died have done a good enough job of showing me just how lucky i am in life. I'm not sure where i stand when it comes to designer genes and babies but i know where i stand on the grounds of preventing diseases like that.
I say that if you can fix and prevent such a horrific thing from happening ever again then its your duty to do so. there will probably be an over population problem w/ or w/o the deaths that will come from such diseases...
I used to be "eh, not my problem" on this kind of issue... but i saw that video one day and it ate at my very core. Forgive me for going a lil over board. I would ask that no1 make jokes about the children from the video if you choose to watch it. And if you get emotional very easy then you might not want to watch it either.
I"m just vary wary of Eugenics on many levels. The part that comes most to mind though is the Giver. That totally hit me in a way that a book hasn't. I know it's fictional, but I fully believe that we as humans are capable of such lengths
