/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.1637090]

How long will we have to wait until it's socially acceptable to talk about eugenics again? There's no doubt it's the better for mankind.

[Anonymous No.1637098]

What is better?

Qualities that would make a good sprinter make a terrible swimmer, and vice versa. Who are we to say which genes are better? Hawkin is an invalid, but a genius. Should he be killed?

[Anonymous No.1637113]

>There's no doubt it's the better for mankind.
That depends. Are we talking mass execution of individuals that are seen as unfit by the authorities, or small scale genetic manipulation to create humans fit for, lets say, long space flights?

[Anonymous No.1637116]

>>1637098

Not OP, but your points imply that the goal needs to be a single variety of humans. Sensible eugenics would embrace the power of variation while weeding out as much bad material as possible.

To argue that this isn't possible, and that natural variations are the only acceptable source of human evolution flies in the face of the evidence of 1000s of years of agriculture and animal breeding.

[Anonymous No.1637127]

All we need eugenics to deal is a certain few hereditary illnesses...

Or the people with those illnesses could stop fucking their children by having them in the first place.

[Anonymous No.1637136]

>>1637116
And yet dairy cows are no longer equipped to survive in the wild.

Seriously. They're dependent on us. They've been shoehorned into a narrow role.

Fail example is fail.

[Anonymous No.1637137]

>>1637116
I'm not arguing that, I'm saying what are good genes?

And all that agriculture has created is animals incapable of being self sufficient, they have lost their maternal instincts due to human interference. We allowed animals that would normally kill their babies to still have successful offspring because of farrowing creates. Just picking "good" traits could be detrimental to the species as a whole.

[Anonymous No.1637144]

Let's just settle on killing Black people and Juggalos. Does that sound reasonable?

[Anonymous No.1637147]

>>1637136

Strawman is fail - one minor counterexample invalidates the entire thing? That's epically retarded. You must be in a special education class.

[Anonymous No.1637148]

Eugenics will happen but it will never be called that.

And it will always remain voluntary.

[Anonymous No.1637151]

We're beyond genetics, friend. Ours is the postracial internet generation, we identify with cultures, not phenotypes. Our debates will be about which cultures and cultural practices should be perpetuated or quashed (see things like democracy/free speech, arraigned marriages, unionization. .)

[Anonymous No.1637155]

>>1637151

The culture wars belong to the baby boomers.

We're just going to not give a fuck.

[Anonymous No.1637170]

1. Sterilize poor and uneducated parents
2. Increase fertility for university-educated parents and desirable heritable characteristics
3. ???
4. Master race travelling through space

[Anonymous No.1637187]

>>1637170
>poor
>wealth is not a genetically relevant factor
>my face

[Anonymous No.1637192]

>>1637187
Poor = Not smart enough to win the strategic game of capitalism

[Anonymous No.1637195]

>>1637192
because all phd's are rolling in money, right?

[Anonymous No.1637197]

>>1637192
But strategy isn't part of it, it's luck or being born wealthy / influential

[Anonymous No.1637240]

>>1637170

>Implying half of the parasites and leeches enrolled in arts and humanities programs deserve to breath.

[Anonymous No.1637244]

>>1637197
Anyone can get rich given the right amount of hard work.
>>1637195
By smart I mean smart in several aspects. Autistic retards who live on welfare can get a phd.

[Anonymous No.1637255]

its not for the betterment of mankind because all that will be left after eugenic genocide will be humans who are hyperviolent, judgemental, and self righteous

[Anonymous No.1637257]

>>1637240
>implying i meant anything under mid-tier

[Anonymous No.1637260]

>>1637090

we have to invest in stem cell and gene research.
eugenics will be irrelevant.

[Anonymous No.1637267]

Eugenics only works if you can create a genetic bottle-neck. You have to kill/sterilize so many people that the species would become endangered.

This won't fly.

[Anonymous No.1637266]

>>1637257
why is astronomy in god tier?

it should be in mid tier at best.

[Anonymous No.1637265]

>>1637255
Exactly the kind of people we will need for the first intergalactic war.

[Anonymous No.1637273]

>>1637267
Weren't humans whittled down to just a few hundred thousand at some point? Maybe Im just thinking of the people that crossed the land bridge from Asia to America.

[Anonymous No.1637277]

>>1637240
>>1637257
>>1637266
Get out. This isn't your thread.

[Anonymous No.1637281]

>>1637257

>Geology

>Top tier

You're damned straight.

[Anonymous No.1637300]

why can't we ask the genetically inferior (dumb, genetic diseases, etc) to not reproduce? they can still have kids, we'll just let them adopt some of the genetically superior babies we have on hand.

[Anonymous No.1637314]

>>1637300
Exterminate them, their life is irrelevant to mankind anyway.

[Anonymous No.1637321]

>>1637090
When incest is legal.

Also, better in comparison to what exactly?

[Anonymous No.1637331]

>>1637314

but their lives are still relevant to them, they'll all be dead in 100 years tops, so what's the damned difference? it's people like you that will prevent anything like this from ever helping mankind, you dick.

[Anonymous No.1637376]

>>1637331

If the existence of these people was inconsequential there would be no need for eugenics in the first place. It's their stupidity, faggotry and incessant panicking that makes this world so shitty.

If you let them exist for another 100 years you'll have another 100 years retarded by retardation.

[Anonymous No.1637380]

>>1637267
Imagine a fresh start with the top 0.5% of the population. No religious retards wasting our energy. No overpopulation.


Only educated minds mating and passing on knowledge to our genetically improved children.

[Anonymous No.1637382]

I love how whenever anybody mentions eugenics, there are cries of "extermination", "eradication" and "mass murder".

Seriously, you just either sterilize people with undesirable genetics (genetically predisposed to a weak heart, cancer, other heredatory diseases). And if that's too unethical, you convince them not to have children through subsidiaries, or convince them to adopt a healthier child.

That, or you ask for 10,000~ or so volunteers, where the only entry requirement is healthy and desirable genes. You give them food, healthcare, housing, education, etc, with the only condition that they can only reproduce with the other 5,000 people (have some sort of legal waver they can sign beforehand). When the children come of age, you give them the option of signing the same contract. If they chose not to, they have to provide for themselves in the world. If they chose to sign it, they're giving the same advantages and stipulations as their parents. Children with unhealthy genes wont be given the option of signing the contract however.

In a handfew generations, you'll have a stable population (granted, some may leave) of genetically healthy people. Perfect pickings for Astronaut training or the like.

But, Genetic Engineering will be able to replace Eugenics in a few decades anyway, so it's a moot point.

On a side note, parents who have a high chance of having children with genetic diseases, especially the horrible ones, and proceed to have children, are douchebags. Especially when adoption is a better option.

[Anonymous No.1637383]

>>1637380
>implying education has a genetic base

[Anonymous No.1637398]

>>1637281
A geologist on /sci/? How do you like it? I'm thinking maybe I should study geology/geophysics/geotechnical engineering after NEETing it up for a year

[Anonymous No.1637399]

>>1637383
Research show that smart parents get smart children. Smart parents without heritable diseases get smart children without heritable diseases.

[Anonymous No.1637406]

>>1637382

I think it would be more effective and manageable to simply convince, somehow, less desirables to stop reproducing or not reproduce at all. This would slowly shift the distribution toward better genes such that someday what would be considered good today will be considered bad comparatively.

[Anonymous No.1637411]

>>1637090
Genetic modification anyone? Fucking idiots.

[Anonymous No.1637420]

>>1637411

[Anonymous No.1637427]

>>1637420

[Anonymous No.1637505]

>>1637420

Proud to be a woman: What a strong, independent, respectable lady.

Proud to be a man: What a fucking chauvanistic, disgusting pig. Surely he's a rapist and a woman- abuser. Let's cut his balls off.

[Anonymous No.1637539]

>>1637505
Proud to be black/Proud to be white

[Anonymous No.1637585]

>>1637539

>Cain Velasquez tattoos "Brown Pride" on his chest.
>Media clamours all over itself claiming it's not at all racist.
>White guy with "White Pride" tattooed on his chest
>What would they say to that...