Is natural selection gone? - What should we do about the mentally and psychically inferior in-order to progress the human race?

[Recoil]

Evolution is all epigenetic now, grandpa.

 

[MZ 052]

As long as I have to pay taxes, I support eugenics.

 

[Julias_Seizure]

Yes but I think were going to get to the point where we can just splice genes to fix it, if we can genetically engineer spider goats and fish tomatoes already its only a matter of time before we start doing the same shit with human genes and if it has positive effects like extending life expectancy gene splicing would be like the new vaccines where everyone gets it and the few who dont are retarded

 

[Bum Driller]

All in all, I would add to the topic that anyone, who is stupid enough to not have learned anything from the horrors eugenicists commited around hundred years ago, should be euthanized. Preferrably by kicking them to the balls until they die, with the OP and other wannabe-nazis being the first to get the boot.

Yes but I think were going to get to the point where we can just splice genes to fix it, if we can genetically engineer spider goats and fish tomatoes already its only a matter of time before we start doing the same shit with human genes and if it has positive effects like extending life expectancy gene splicing would be like the new vaccines where everyone gets it and the few who dont are exceptional

Technically speaking there is nothing to stop us from doing some heavy-duty genetical manipulation on humans in the present...except that it's almost totally forbidden everywhere, due to certain moral concerns.

 

[Julias_Seizure]

All in all, I would add to the topic that anyone, who is stupid enough to not have learned anything from the horrors eugenicists commited around hundred years ago, should be euthanized. Preferrably by kicking them to the balls until they die, with the OP and other wannabe-nazis being the first to get the boot.



Technically speaking there is nothing to stop us from doing some heavy-duty genetical manipulation on humans in the present...except that it's almost totally forbidden everywhere, due to certain moral concerns.

Im talking hundreds of years in the future when the science is well enough understood to actually be done ethically. Your the only one calling for people to be euthanized
Yeah obvious moral concerns because of the nazis attempting it in the shittiest way possible. Eventually if theres possible benefits like longer life expectancy that you could get by having genes altered i think a lot of people would go for it given the choice

 

[A Welsh Cake]

On the topic of Eugenics, why are Eugenicists against race-mixing when it serves to broaden the gene pool and can lead to a further passing of beneficial genes between races?

Is it just that they hate blacks?

 

[Recoil]

On the topic of Eugenics, why are Eugenicists against race-mixing when it serves to broaden the gene pool and can lead to a further passing of beneficial genes between races?

Is it just that they hate blacks?

I think that's it, but there's more to it. In all human populations throughout history we see beauty ideals centering around light skin. South America, Africa, Asia, India - you name it, the people there all want to be the light skinned one. When the Spanish conquistadors were raping their way through south america, they pretty much viewed their mass impregnations as them doing the indigenous population a favor because the next generations of those people would be light skinned.

So there's this pre-existing aesthetic bias that the eugenics ppl didn't want to go against, that would've been a fools errand back when eugenics was first proposed.

 

[Oskar Dirlewanger]

I remember once I had to refrain from shitting for few days and then when I finally succumbed to my need to shit, the accumulated fecal matter erupted from my ass in a millisecond, my ass turning into a shit cannon that sprayed out a great mass of pressurized feces with tremendous power.

You can't fool your ass and you can't fool natural selection. Industrial civilization is a giant life support system that can only get more fragile as the population grows. Humans won't be omitted from anthropocene extinction, agriculture becomes more and more unsustainable as the global area with useful vegetative period length shrinks, cities will starve, and an all out war for basic resources will erupt everywhere. The future belongs to the elite few of us not afraid of becoming cannibal methheads scavenging the postnuclear desert for some delicious long pig.

This is why no eugenic policies are needed, the greatest eugenicist, the ass of history itself, is as we speaking brewing a shitstorm the scale of which was previously unknown.

 

[heyilikeyourmom]

The argument that the mentally and physically disabled can’t make worthwhile contributions to society is a fallacy. Thomas Edison and Beethoven were both deaf, and they invented the lightbulb and public domain music respectively.

And I, as a specimen of both mental and physical near-perfection, don’t contribute anything of value.

 

[Recoil]

The argument that the mentally and physically disabled can’t make worthwhile contributions to society is a fallacy. Thomas Edison and Beethoven were both deaf, and they invented the lightbulb and public domain music respectively.

Learning sign language also improves IQ scores considerably.

 

[stuffandthings]

Learning sign language also improves IQ scores considerably.

Yeah. They've found out that by not teaching deaf kids sign language you are dooming them to be permanently exceptional because you're not providing their brain a vocabulary to think abstractly with during a crucial point of brain development.

It's always made me wonder if the dogs and chimps that learn significant numbers of words become smarter in all respects than their peers.

 

[Recoil]

Yeah. They've found out that by not teaching deaf kids sign language you are dooming them to be permanently exceptional because you're not providing their brain a vocabulary to think abstractly with during a crucial point of brain development.

It's always made me wonder if the dogs and chimps that learn significant numbers of words become smarter in all respects than their peers.

I shoulda been more clear. It improves IQ in people who CAN hear. Anyone who takes the time to learn sign language gets a nice boost to certain abstract reasoning modalities. Source.

 

[Dimetrodon]

The Bell Curve made a pretty good case using data for how society would be better off having a higher mean IQ. I would say that given the low genetic diversity of our species and the obvious ethical problems with eugenics that we should look forward to gene editing in the future, especially given that genes (alleles really) that correlate with high intelligence are being discovered every year. Not to mention that there's undoubtedly an environmental component to intelligence that can be researched, especially given that the children of low IQ mothers that are adopted by a high IQ family tend to be quite a bit more intelligent than their mothers. But of course, blank slaters hamper everything.

 

[RadicalCentrist]

Thread is nearly entirely incorrect. Buck v Bell has been a part of US Law for nearly a century now. The federal government reserves for itself the privilege of sterilizing the unworthy. We, the people, have no say in it.

 

[Emperor Julian]

Curious how those who bring this sort of thing never consider compasion, tolerance of deviation and an interest in the wellfare of others might be assets to a species.
Then again they never consisder they might be on the 'purge' end of Eugenics since we're typically not talking about the best and brightest here.

 

[spurger king]

compasion, tolerance of deviation and an interest in the wellfare of others

cringe.

Also instead of trying to autistically figure out how to edit genes/sterilize brainlets to make your utopia, why not just introduce selection pressure into the environment in ways that favor intelligent people?

 

[Emperor Julian]

cringe.

Have you never needed some to help you out without their own gain?

 

[Schinna]

On the topic of Eugenics, why are Eugenicists against race-mixing when it serves to broaden the gene pool and can lead to a further passing of beneficial genes between races?

Is it just that they hate blacks?

It'll lead to passing of less beneficial genes as well, and putting two things together doesn't guarantee a better organism with both of the traits so much as one that is an in between. Like a jack of all trades, master of none. It's like trying to combine a Mack and a Ferrari and expecting the result to have the best of both worlds, when chances are it'll only be worse at both.

 

[Schinna]

All in all, I would add to the topic that anyone, who is stupid enough to not have learned anything from the horrors eugenicists commited around hundred years ago, should be euthanized. Preferrably by kicking them to the balls until they die, with the OP and other wannabe-nazis being the first to get the boot.

All in all, I would like to add to the topic that anyone, who is stupid enough to not have learned anything from the horrors doctors commited around hundred years ago, should be euthanized. Preferrably by kicking them to the balls until they die, with the OP and other wannabe-doctors being the first to get the boot.

Medicine up until maybe a hundred years ago was horrid and often served no other purpose than to harm the patient. Just because practitioners of the past did reprehensible and damaging things does not make the entire field of medicine invalid.
We have new technologies and new understandings of how these things work. We're learning more every single day about how we can improve people's lives, and often being held back from it because of stick in the mud types such as yourself who refuse to consider it because asshats did bad shit a hundred years ago. Maybe back then their only options were to shoot or horribly sterilize their victims, but then is not now.

 

[Bum Driller]

Medicine up until maybe a hundred years ago was horrid and often served no other purpose than to harm the patient. Just because practitioners of the past did reprehensible and damaging things does not make the entire field of medicine invalid.
We have new technologies and new understandings of how these things work. We're learning more every single day about how we can improve people's lives, and often being held back from it because of stick in the mud types such as yourself who refuse to consider it because asshats did bad shit a hundred years ago. Maybe back then their only options were to shoot or horribly sterilize their victims, but then is not now.

You are seriously defending eugenics?