/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.5317347]

Can someone explain to me why Eugenics is a bad thing?

Pic related.

[Anonymous No.5317352]

>>5317347
Because genetic diversity is a good thing...and Eugenics actively prevents that.

[Anonymous No.5317353]

>>5317347
On a small scale, its fine (vaccines), but larger scale like more expensive gene modifications that only the rich can afford would fuck over the poor. Rich get richer and smarter/healthier/sexier/etc via genetics, while poor would suffer more and more. And its not just the poor, the middle people will also be stuck in the loop. Rich being smarter/stronger/sexier means they control the world/government and fuck over the poor to a much more extreme case than it is today.

Not to mention the repercussions of extended use of gene mods over generations will probably create different species. Sorta like Eloi and Morlocks.

[Anonymous No.5317370]

>>5317352
Apparently desexing mentally retarded girls is commonplace. Given your "genetic diversity is a good thing" view, you'd be opposed to said desxing, yeah? The more retards the better, yeah?

[Anonymous No.5317374]

>>5317370
>hurr durr Down Syndrome is genetic

[Anonymous No.5317375]

>>5317374
...hell yeah I wanna down syndrome mommy too!

[Anonymous No.5317376]

>>5317347
It's a bad thing at our level of knowledge, as we still don't clearly know what gene determine what and what is determined only by environment or by combination of genes and environment.

Also, eugenic can, normally, only make planned improvement on what is already known and greatly reduce the chance of "fortunate" mutation. In other word, it put a stop, or strongly slow down the evolution process, as eugenic make people stick to one working model without allowing for new possibility to emerges.

It's something natural reproduction is much more prone to do.

Last but not least, it make us weaker to virus and bacteriological attacks, as everyone defense system is based on the same model. If a new deadly virus emerge, everyone is as much as condemned.

So, to recap, Eugenic is no good for diversity.

[sage No.5317380]

>>5317375
Obvious troll
>sage goes in all fields

[Anonymous No.5317383]

>>5317347
Because we don't get it. Genetics is not really a science atm. In the end, when you think you can apply pseudo-scientific bullshit IRL, you'll cause more harm than if you just do nothing.

[Anonymous No.5317396]

>>5317383
Also, inb4 someone argues "hurr durr but genetics is done in labs, so it is science". As this guy >>5317376 said, genetics lacks a true understanding of the genome, i.e. it lacks any predictive theories of more than trivial explanatory power. Once they develop a predictive model instead of just a catalog of test results, they can start to be called a science.

Once we understand DNA as well as we understand C, we may as well program humans with it. Atm, I wouldn't use a browser based on so little understood "software", let alone let a human life depend on it...

[Anonymous No.5317393]

I am weakly against it. If Eugenics is invented people will have that capacity, and I dont trust that any person or agency could wield it responsibly.

Often pro-genetic modification people claim stuff like "We will make everyone smarter! Taller! Bigger dicks! ecetera!" I think these people are naive.

We arent talking about wise or rational people. We are talking about plain ol' people. People who want to fit in, people who dont know things, people who want to watch television and work boring jobs.

I dont think we have any reason to assume these people are qualified to design their own kids. Realistically these people want kids who fit in more than they want kids who are smart. Sure, they'd prefer a kid who is smart. But is it worth him being an outcast? Is it worth depression and alienation? Not from the point of view of a typical parent (if they were honest).

Now you could argue for some committee of rational people to be in charge, but how realistic that such a regulatory agency could exist?

There is no rush. We dont need to destroy ourselves. Social pressures are already pushing us into some kind of genetic specialization.

>>5317352

I am pretty sure Eugenics is only defined by the active modification of human genetics. Eugenics could plausibly increase diversity. Its not about just stopping X people from breeding.

[Anonymous No.5317399]

>>5317370
Genetic diversity increases fitness retard.

[Anonymous No.5317401]

Because genetic diversity is good.
Because the people white trash who support eugenics think have good genes do not.
Because people are corrupt.
Because ... well a million other things

[Anonymous No.5317405]

>>5317399

First of all, this should be talked about relative to a population, not an individual. An individual with some mixed and matched traits from various populations is not necessarily better of. There are associated benefits, but that isnt an absolute advantage over some non-diverse individual.

Speaking relative to a population, we need diversity because of our inter-dependency. I subscribe to this view of psychological and genetic specialization. One of society's crucial components is extreme individuals, whether that be extremely smart, or extremely aggressive, or extremely kind etc. Extreme individuals arent necessarily successful at reproducing, but they continuously come into existence by the traits existing among normal people. Normal people who depend on society need the extreme people.

Its like, gardening companies often intentionally breed their seeds so the next generation sucks. The result is you have to buy more seeds. The population as a whole succeeds by the engineered death of a sub population. The same thing (I suspect) happens in people. Social forces breed extreme individuals into existence so that the community benefits, but the extreme individuals themselves die off childless.

Society needs diversity so that practical members come into existence. But diversity doesnt necessarily benefit particular members.

[Anonymous No.5317427]

The only reason people are against eugenics is because it would obviously involve intelligence and this would mean we'd have to sterilize 80% of blacks and perhaps 50% of hispanics. So it's a political and racial issue. Eugenics would otherwise do wonders for society, imagine breeding thousand and thousand of geniuses, these Einsteins, Newtons, Faradays, and Eulers are the ones who advance civilization, not a black household with 10 little shits on welfare.

[Anonymous No.5317430]

>>5317401
And you think you have good genes? You can hardly spell you worthless scum.

[Anonymous No.5317443]

>>5317430
And you can barely quote.
Unless you did in fact quote the person you meant to, in which case you can barely read or form a coherent post

[sage No.5317450]

>>5317443
abandon ship dude, you're posting in a /pol/ troll thread
sage

[Anonymous No.5317453]

>>5317450
Sage isn't a downvote, redditor.

[Anonymous No.5317459]

The eugenics questionnaire should be very simple, consisting of one question:
Do you think eugenics is a good idea? Y / N
All those who answer Y are euthanised

[Anonymous No.5317463]

>>5317459
And all the smart people who voted yes would be dead and the only people left would be blacks and mexicans demanding their food stamps and welfare. But without those evil smart people who provided all the money, no welfare or food stamps are to be had. Riots all over the country ensue, entire cities burn, the infrastructure is wiped out and due to lack of an economy, lack of food, the blacks and mexicans all die out.

[Anonymous No.5317468]

In 100 years or less we'll have genetic manipulation making eugenics completely void. Starting a eugenics program now will yield absolutely no results in 100 years except pissing people off.

Just drop it already.

[Anonymous No.5317477]

>>5317463
>smart people who voted yes
You mean those yokels who live in the woods and eat skunks?
Hate to break it to you, but they're not smart, they just think they are.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

[Anonymous No.5317483]

Because our society is going through an era of liberalism.
People will bitch and moan about human rights.
I personally believe that those with higher value to society should be offered perks for multiple offspring whilst dropouts should have their privileges revoked. It is inexcusable that every single girl on my facebook that has had a baby are people that should not be breeding. There will be a general downward trend in intellect (of value/the classical sense of the word) while our society becomes increasingly socially orientated.

As stated before, eugenics will decrease variation, however, variation is subjective. We are evolving to fit into social boundaries (basically we will become better and better sheep). But we are also evolving to be better at externally organizing info, where people are going to stop being able to make the ground breaking connections that one could only make by the creative synthesis of two ideas present and understood in their mind.

[Anonymous No.5317487]

>>5317380
Dumbass. Sage is not a downvote. Go back to reddit.

[Anonymous No.5317494]

>>5317483

Why appeal to society?

[Anonymous No.5317505]

>>5317483
>however, variation is subjective
No it's not.
Do you even can into understand DNA?

[Anonymous No.5317513]

>>5317505
If genetic variation is so important and useful why not implant the genes of chimpanzees into the human genome?

Genetic diversity is a load of hogwash and not of any benefit at all.

What's happening in our society is the opposite of eugenics, the smart are not breeding enough and the scum of the earth on welfare are having 10 babies per worthless female, in order to claim more benefits.
We are going towards a less diverse society the opposite way.
Fucking left wing retards.

[Anonymous No.5317518]

>>5317347
Trying to remove negative traits through entirely voluntary action is fine. No one has a problem with that.

Attempting to use some sort of force or incentive to go for positive traits has questionable benefits, and clear harms or at least slippery slope arguments. It has yet to be demonstrate to me that a smarter society will necessarily be a happier or freer society.

[Anonymous No.5317527]

>>5317513
>why not implant the genes of chimpanzees into the human genome?
Good question.
Technology not mature enough yet.
We already share plenty of our DNA with them.
But basically, in the future we'll be able to, and should. Why not have humans who put on twice the amount of muscle mass without any effort?
Welp, and that just goes to show how shitty eugenics is compared to actual science. With eugenics it's like trying to play the lottery using a strategy (in other words fucking stupid). With science we'll be able to customise DNA carefully and precisely.
>What's happening in our society is the opposite of eugenics, the smart are not breeding enough.... <rest of long stupid rant>
PROTIP: That's what they said 100 years ago. And 1000 years ago. And 1100 years ago. And 2000 years ago. And ...

[Anonymous No.5317528]

>>5317505
We're saying that right now is 'healthy variation' and if we promote eugenics then we will be destroying variation. In this sense variation has a subjective meaning. In my tier system eugenics, variation is being taken from its direction now and instead being pushed in a different direction by suppressing the birthing of certain groups while promoting proliferation of others.

In Layman's: variation towards idiots is the same as variation towards genius, it is all a matter of who breeds more and who breeds less. People are thinking that just because certain people are pushed to breed less will result in no genetic variation, but all that is happening is that we are influencing the path of evolution. If you take the scientists that can't get laid because they are socially inept and help them out, then you won't have the socially skilled, yet quantitatively stupid people influencing the general trend of societal evolution.

[Anonymous No.5317529]

We are 7 billion people, eugenics won't make a dent in diversity.

Google William James Sidis.


Imagine if we could give everyone that kind of mental capacity. What we could not do, what humanity could not achieve. Eugenics is the easy way to biological singularity, yet we are foolish enough to be afraid of it.

[Anonymous No.5317532]

ITT Humans cant into individuality.

Eugenics is good for maybe for a more advanced society than today. We are nor ready yet.

[Anonymous No.5317535]

>Eugenics gets implemented
>99% of the people who supported it are classed as rejects and refused their right to breed
>B-b-but I have good genetics!
>No. No you don't.
>Ok. Stop! This was all an just excuse to get me more pussy! Please don't!
>That's nice. We don't care. We're still going to castrate you. YHLHAND

[Anonymous No.5317536]

>>5317535
Tiered system for diversity aside, I think in order to vote for eugenics you'd have to be willing to give up your tiny blip of a lineage for the betterment of humanity.

[Anonymous No.5317546]

>>5317535

Eh, I don't give a rats ass if if its my genes or not. My reason is that I want to get to the stars as fast as possible, and smarter humans means faster development.

Besides, with most people being castrated there is a good chance society will develop a much freer view on sex anyway.

[Anonymous No.5317557]

>>5317529

Uhh, Sidis went crazy but the idea is still good. If we can engineer smarter people we should do it. At the very least we should eliminate retardism from the gene pool. In 100 years we could end wars by engineering people to think for themselves versus going all terrorist on innocent people.

[Anonymous No.5317580]

>>5317557


Crazy? No, he never went crazy, all I can find was that he was arrested for joining a socialist parade and his parents managed to get him out of prison by interning him in their sanitarium.

[Anonymous No.5317588]

Why do many ITT deem eugenics a strategy promoted by rednecks? They have nothing to do with each other.

[Anonymous No.5317595]

>>5317529
This.
If you want to do something to preserve diversity, complain about abortion rather than opposing eugenics. You never see any self-righteous political correctness white knight mention that.

[Anonymous No.5317619]

>>5317535
I would be OK with this. If my genes aren't good enough, than I don't deserve to breed. That doesn't prevent me from knowing that we have to do something to prevent the stupid from taking over humanity.

[Anonymous No.5317632]

>>5317595

Yea, consider this;

Einstein in terms of IQ was approximately in the top one percentile of the population.

Meaning that about one percent of humanity have the same or higher intelligence than Einstein.

With seven billion people that is about 70 million individuals, that is more than enough to maintain genetic diversity.

In fact, I remember reading some Nasa study of multi-generation spaceships that found that the bare minimum for normal breeding to maintain genetic diversity was something like 150 individuals.

We could uplift the entire human species to an average of what we now consider genius level intelligence in one generation by using the genetic material from these 70 million individuals as basis.

[Anonymous No.5317640]

>>5317483
>variation is subjective

what in the actual fuck did i just read

> We are evolving to fit into social boundaries (basically we will become better and better sheep)

Well then.

>>5317513
>If genetic variation is so important and useful why not implant the genes of chimpanzees into the human genome?

For a board that claims biology isn't a science, you sure do understand fucking zilch about it.

[Anonymous No.5317651]

>>5317632
>IQ = intelligence

ISHYGDDT

[Anonymous No.5317668]

>>5317632
I'm going to have to stop you right there and explain to you that IQ isn't what you think it is. IQ is the mental capacity for you to recognize patterns and recall information. This makes it easier for you to learn/retain knowledge. It doesn't make you a genius if you don't put any work into it.

[Anonymous No.5317689]

>>5317640
PROTIP: they're from /pol/, not /sci/

[Anonymous No.5317695]

>>5317651
>>5317668

No, on that you are factually wrong (both in what was implied and what was stated), IQ measure intelligence, and a high IQ makes you a genius per definition.

IQ is short for intelligence quotient and it is well established that it is and accurate measure for intelligence.

Genius is something you are born with.

[Anonymous No.5317700]

>>5317695
IQ tests let you extrapolate Spearman's 'g Factor', friend, which is the ACTUAL measure of cognitive intelligence.

[Anonymous No.5317709]

>>5317347
people who name their kids that will either realize it was a bad idea and call them by their middle name or change their first to something more reasonable.
and if they dont, their kid will commit suicide by age 18 or change it theirself, so its no big deal
and if neither of those happens, their child will be proud to be named hashtag, and if theyre happy then who cares?

[Anonymous No.5317716]

>>5317700

Err, yea. g is what is being measured by a IQ test. IQ is simply the scale to measure it with...

Like how one is measuring the distance, but use meters (america need not apply) as the scale to measure it with.

[Anonymous No.5317737]

>>5317632
thats bs. you're not talking into account racial differences in intelligence.

[Anonymous No.5317758]

>>5317737

No, that is taking entire human population into account. I.e. Einstein was in the top 1 percentile relative to the entire human population. How intelligence vary between races are as such irrelevant.

[Anonymous No.5317761]

>>5317347
Because natural selection is less arbitrary and infinitely more pragmatic than human selection.
We're better off allowing all mutations a chance at life rather than stifling them.
We're better off being varied and not being a monoculture. Overspecialize and you breed in weakness, variety helps all species.

[Anonymous No.5317799]

>>5317758
No. He was top 1% relative to the average intelligence in America or Western Europe (broadly similar). The average IQ of those places is around 100.

Africans, arabs, south asians have average IQs around 70-85, meaning Einstein's IQ was probably much higher relative to the world, rather than relative to the West.

[Anonymous No.5317801]

>>5317761
You're a fucking retard if you believe that. Go back to your sociology class, nigger.

[Anonymous No.5317810]

>>5317799

Nah, I use the international measure. Relative to the west he would be more like top 2 percentile.

[Anonymous No.5317811]

>>5317761

qouting a movie

aren't you supposed to be in school right now?

[Anonymous No.5317836]

>>5317761
This.

And any way that humans would ever try would eventually become warped and disgusting.

[Anonymous No.5317849]

>>5317836
But niggers are already disgusting, can't we get rid of them now?

[sage No.5317851]

>>5317849
>>>/pol/

[Anonymous No.5317879]

== Genetic Basis for Human Intelligence Confirmed ==
Genome-wide association studies establish that human intelligence is highly heritable and polygenic
Molecular Psychiatry; 9 August 2011; doi:10.1038/mp.2011.85

"Our results unequivocally confirm that a substantial proportion of individual differences in human intelligence is due to genetic variation, and are consistent with many genes of small effects underlying the additive genetic influences on intelligence."

"We estimate that 40% of the variation in crystallized-type intelligence and 51% of the variation in fluid-type intelligence between individuals is accounted for by linkage disequilibrium between genotyped common SNP markers and unknown causal variants."

www.nature.com/mp/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/mp201185a.html

== IQ Reflects Anatomical Brain Differences ==
Genetics of Brain Structure and Intelligence
Annu. Rev. Neuroscience; 2005. 28:1–23; doi: 10.1146/annurev.neuro.28.061604.135655

"Genetic influences on brain morphology and IQ are well studied. A variety of sophisticated brain-mapping approaches relating genetic influences on brain structure and intelligence establishes a regional distribution for this relationship that is consistent with behavioral studies. We highlight those studies that illustrate the complex cortical patterns associated with measures of cognitive ability. A measure of cognitive ability, known as g, has been shown highly heritable across many studies. We argue that these genetic links are partly mediated by brain structure that is likewise under strong genetic control."

loni.ucla.edu/~thompson/PDF/TT_ARN05.pdf

[Anonymous No.5317889]

>>5317370
who is going to fuck a person with down's syndrome

[Anonymous No.5317944]

>This thread

At least now I know why so many people on this board reject Biology as a valid science. They don't understand it, it's too complicated for them.

[Anonymous No.5318027]

Eugenics is a good idea, on paper.

In reality you'd run into quite a few problems.
1. It would end up being used to discriminate against the poor and politically opposed, just like every other idea to exert power over the common man.
2. It seems like a great idea until you're told you can't have a kid because you're at a risk for some disease or are just too ugly.
3. If anyone in power was interested in making a race of smart, strong humans, the U.S. government wouldn't be subsidizing unhealthy foods and always putting education on the fiscal chopping block first.
4. If anyone in power was interested in quality vs. quantity the catholic church wouldn't be spreading lies about birth control.

If it somehow worked for the betterment of us all I'd imagine the religious folk would slowly die out, successfully averting their goal of outbreeding everyone else.

[Anonymous No.5318039]

You faggots are silly thinking the only reason the world isn't in better shape is because the right genius hasn't been born yet.
We have all the money and resources to make this world a paradise for everyone but our species' list of priorities is seriously fucked up.
Please tell me how we should give better living conditions to the billions who live on less than $2 a day, without suggesting genocide.

[Anonymous No.5318059]

>>5318039
What makes you think we haven't tried?
We've been building shelters and feeding blacks for the past 50 years. All it does it promote more black offspring which we then have to feed as well. It's an everlasting ponzi scheme. We've just gotta let the blacks do it alone, and if they can't, they deserve to die and their genes wiped out.
Natural selection, ho!

tfw billions wasted on Haiti and the apes are still living in camps and tents.

[Anonymous No.5318078]

>>5318027
Point 1 & 2 are exactly the reasons why It wouldn't work.

Regarding the religious people: If technological progress like this they will die out naturally. Simply because religion will be considered as not benefiting as much as other activities.

However this will not bring end to large groups of people preferring to believe bullshit. Due to technology being present in all aspects in life, there are new ideas which will become more popular. Eg, ideas like the simulation hypothesis and brain the vat concept might end up in people making up a systems of beliefs working similar to the ancient religions.

[Anonymous No.5318082]

Prince Charles is the result of eugenics through royal breeding.
Case closed.

[Anonymous No.5318129]

You all talk about diversity like its the most important thing. You can have diversity and eugenics shouldn't be looked at from a color stand point, rather a what's best for humanity standpoint.

If you have complete idiots raising children, not being there for them, doing drugs and not providing guidance, the child is destined (in most cases) to continue this trend, much like the movie Idiocracy.

Now I hope most of you are above average intelligence to know that me along with everyone in this thread do not want that for our descendants, but it seems that's where we will head without some sort of eugenics.

Now I know society has a lot to do with the way children are raised and that is on a constant, drastic decline every year, the more people you add to the equation.

For the human race to be successful, intelligent, and strong, the only way I see it happening is with a form of population control. We can't reach the stars if our civilization finds call of duty and naming their children after social network shit to be the most important thing.

[Anonymous No.5318142]

>>5317889
You ever watch Law and Order?

[Anonymous No.5318160]

Not bad, just arguably immoral and futile when you look at the bigger picture.

[Anonymous No.5318172]

>>5318129
>We can't reach the stars if our civilization finds call of duty and naming their children after social network shit to be the most important thing.

Human civilization will never be monolithic. There will never be an age where everyone is an intellectual, because of how a prosperous system balances itself. Economic surplus allows people to be lax, economic hardship requires people to put forth effort.

In what possible age would everyone have to be in the stems? Why should the average American know any math besides arithmetic? If they don't do these things, they will still survive and be happy.

When we reach the stars, we will still have a common class, an intellectual class, a ruling class, and a wealthy class ect.

Hopefully at that time we will be beyond those people being a burden.

[Anonymous No.5318581]

>why is eugenics a bad thing

Because it's a shitty method, dependent on the whims of any single given culture's priorities. And at any given time for any given reason can be rendered useless.

Genetic engineering is a bit better but will most likely suffer from unbalanced specialization where any given field can become monopolized by a few (hundred) individuals who can outperform others. This will be made more worse when robots become more prevalent in the workforce thus reducing the needed capacity for skilled and unskilled labor even more than they have done now.

>insert several walls of text talking about future government welfare, selection for intelligence, population control, advance machine efficiency critically reducing our jobs, resource problems, genetic diversity loss, more resource problems, man vs. machine issues in the work force, questioning of the use and worth of educational institutions both high and low, space travel, economics of space travel, planetary travel and how traits we both knew of and did not know of exist and are needed to live on these worlds. But thanks to our superior intelligence we now have re-engineer ourselves future just to fit in.
>blah blah blah
>blah blah blah

tl:dr, there is no need for eugenics because the efficiency of technology is already doing that for us. So why waste resources and time on something thats already being done in the first place, since you know it's already happening and will most likely fuck us over big time for many years to come.