/sci/ - Science & Math

>>10458675
what are you talking about, i'm not the guy that came up with an analogy thinking it's a good argument(just like you did)

the expectancy of a throw of a dice is 3.5 hurrr durr
analogies are for retards and 100% sure sign of lack of logical thinking, concreteness or aptitude - but that's beside the point

here's another retard that would rather go for the lower hanging fruit - the analogy
>>10458683
>>10458685
eugenics based on race is bullshit because i can come up with millions of examples where you'd be wrong to use race when you could just use a favorite metric IQ, along with other things like long term memory, vocab etc.

and as you all agreed with me, 'no two people are the same, people aren't equal, people are different etc.' which is always true unlike predictions based on race which is not always true - ie wrong
and the only reason you'd pick something that is wrong rather than right is because you are an ideologue

the question is simply:
Would you rather base a eugenics program on intelligence or on race

basing it on intelligence is just the correct answer, i don't even see why you are arguing here

also
>Which is why we don't agree mentally or emotionally with your propositions.
>we