Eugenics

You can't help you were born the way you were, a frog can't help that it was born a frog, a cat a cat, a dog a dog, and a retard a retard. Every creature is deserving of life.

>>3162216
It's very pseudo-scientific, especially Galton's work which is very interesting desu.
He worked out that ancient Greeks were superior to his contemporary Englishmen who ranked very highly.
His methodology was compelling, by looking at a races propensity to produce great individuals. Trouble is, terms like "race" and "great", while they do have some intrinsic value and hard meaning are ultimately too subjective and charged.
Also there's the problem that a few great individuals can create circumstances whereby a higher proportion of individuals can come to fruition (Gutenberg makes it economically viable for a far greater share of society to be exposed to the written word), many men that we would define as great may have lived and died ignominiously due to any number of factors.

It's a dangerous subject, and I don't think you have to be a leftypol tumblrina to question the motives of someone who pursues it, maybe when we have formidable and impartial AI - we should ask it to explore the field.

This said, it's not complete bunk, it's still kind of practiced today; women in western nations are given the option to terminate a pregnancy if the signs of down-syndrome are there.

I think eugenics happens every time someone goes to the dentist to remove rotten teeth, or a woman mates with a 6 ft 4 athlete instead of a 5 ft 6 balding manlet.

So, I guess I don't have much against eugenics, and even if I did, it would happen anyway.

I think it's downplayed and discouraged by the elite because it is the only true threat to the monopoly they have on the various societal structures from which they derive their power.

>>3162216
>be 6'0
>work out
>have big muscles
>go to some ivy league university and get a job by just having influence and not actually good grades
>"plese give me your semen, you are truly superior"

That's why eugenics is shitty. However, now there are ways to determine if you have actually good genes, aming eugenics actually useful.
>>3164304
Do you think the elite is some sort of hivemind? You are right, yes, but it's because it's pretty obvious since they don't want to lose their status.

>>3164329
>Do you think the elite is some sort of hivemind?
Where did I imply they are or that they have to be? Group preferences are emergent and do not have to be coordinated.

>>3164335
I thought that because you said "the elite" instead of the high class. Also, eugenics are practiced almost by everyone (women with big hips, men with wider shoulders, etc). The controversy is to if eugenics should be enforced (or encouraged) by the state.

>>3164353
Eugenics as an issue of governance was always more about combatting blatantly dysgenic practices than it was about breeding six foot 150 iq supermen in any event.

>>3164335
>Where did I imply they are or that they have to be

Where you said "they" have a "monopoly." You can't have a monopoly unless you are a single entity, by definition. It also doesn't make sense as a claim either way. It's certainly in "the elite"'s best interest to practice eugenics, hive mind or otherwise.

>>3164360
That's because statesmen aren't autistic as eugenics proponents. Their endgame was to make supermen.

I think encouraging eugenics (so liberal eugenics) isn't wrong. As I said, everyone does it, when you get a boner by looking at big tits and get to fuck that woman then it's somewhat eugenics.

I don't know how liberal eugenics should be promoted as an official policy, it seems it would piss a lot of people.

>>3164353
>Also, eugenics are practiced almost by everyone (women with big hips, men with wider shoulders, etc)

That's not practicing eugenics. Unattractive people have plenty of children, they just end up with one another.

>>3164372
>unattractive

Yeah but they pic the best one of all their possible ugly partners.

>>3164368
It's in the elite's interests to practice eugenics among themselves but not amomg every one else. "Eugenics" in the context of the op generally implies all encompassing society wide policing of breeding.

Elites in that context are generic placeholder. Psychiatrists have no incentives to tell the mentally ill not to breed it runs contrary to their guild interests. Marketing execs want the average iq to be as low as possible. NBA players certainly wouldn't take kindly to a law requiring people over six feet to have more than two children. High iq people generally don't want more high iq people running around that can compete with them for whatever sinecure jobs they hold. Society wide dysgenics is generally a good thing for the people at the top in whatever milieu they happen to find themselves in.

Etc.

>>3164388
>eugenics is adopted by the state
>enforces it as the spartans did
>new elite emerges, grows so big that the homoioi are a thing
>equality is finally true
>tfw no eugenistic communism

it's contrary to known facts of genetic science

>>3164397
'Difference is so small, less than one percent' and thus 'it doesn't matter'.
But when
>Canine
>Difference of less than one percent
>Big difference.

>>3164407
what are you on about? I haven't mentioned anything about "small differences". Why do you think you know what my argument is before I say it?

>>3164410
One can quess and quessing right is made easier if irritation emerge when challenged.

And no, it is not contrary to 'known facts of genetic science'. Quite the opposite.

File: 1500431494523.png (139KB, 394x360px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 394x360px

>tfw barring literal mongs from breeding via laws is considered unethical but ending up as an incel and a victim of the cock carrousel and sexual liberation where you can't even get your dick wet with no intention of impregnation is simply to be accepted as a fact of life
What do I think of eugenics? My friend we are living through the most brutal period of eugenical cleansing probably in our specie's history.

Heh proponents of eugenics aren't superhumans themselves so they're wrong XD

>>3164388

That's really not true, though. I mean, some people might believe that, but it's not actually in anyone's best interest to make the next generation "inferior." A cabal of NBA players has no motivation to prevent tall people from having babies, since a current NBA player will never compete with a baby born today. A higher IQ population will be a richer population, which is good for marketing execs and scientists and everyone else besides.

>>3164452
>A cabal of NBA players has no motivation to prevent tall people from having babies, since a current NBA player will never compete with a baby born today.
They will certainly be competing with the NBA player's children, making the pot smaller for him. Guild interests.
>>3164452
>A higher IQ population will be a richer population, which is good for marketing execs and scientists and everyone else besides.
A higher iq society would start to ask too many questions about why the marketing exec is peddling garbage they don't need while living in a penthouse in the sky, beside being less susceptible to mass marketing in the first place.

>>3164428
Jesus Christ just sleep with a prostitute.

>>3164472

I guess that's why companies spend all their money marketing to thedumbest countries, then. Oh, wait, it's actually the opposite of that.

Marketing is aimed at it's audience. If people were smarter, marketing would be smarter, and they'd make me money doing it.

>>3164294
>I think eugenics happens every time someone goes to the dentist to remove rotten teeth
are you a idiot? eugenics involves improving a human population by controlled breeding to optimize desirable hereditary characteristics among it. It is NOT about an individual getting a cosmetic improvement.

>or a woman mates with a 6 ft 4 athlete instead of a 5 ft 6 balding manlet.
closer, but still retarded. Eugenics requires taking a society-wide view of things. One women sleeping with an athlete can be interpreted in a variety of ways. First of all, is the women in question a "desirable" specimen herself? How successful an athlete is the male? Does the male have an aptitude for hard work? Does he have other favorable qualities? Do any of them have genetic defects or tendencies to heart disease, mental illness or cancer? You see, your simple-minded idea of eugenics as "women mating with brawny men" is why eugenics is such a controversial topics. Brainlets like you will inevitably spin it as an iteration of broscience where le alpha male chad is the pinnacle of human development, when that is utterly misleading.

File: 1423817162507.png (111KB, 249x250px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 249x250px

>Genetically disadvantaged people still compete and fight their way to the top
>Lets strip them of their right to even compete

>>3164519
More like let's strip them of the ability to use CRISPR to edit out shitty genetic illnesses because it's """""""unethical""""""".

>>3164369
>As I said, everyone does it, when you get a boner by looking at big tits and get to fuck that woman then it's somewhat eugenics.
stop treating humans as if they're nothing more than impetuous apes. there's a big fucking difference between admiring a girl's tits (which, by the way, is very much subjective) and actually marrying and sleeping with that girl because of the sole reason of her boobs. Have you ever stopped to think that there are other motives behind pairing off? Economic ones, social ones, ones having to do with coincidence, proximity in the workplace, emotional compatibility?

File: download.jpg (4KB, 205x245px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 205x245px

>>3164388
>It's in the elite's interests to practice eugenics among themselves but not amomg every one else.
hai der fren

>>3164536
Eugenics isnt just about genetic illnesses
If you've read the thread you'll see people talking about "improving" the population by neutering people because of IQ or height

This is exactly why eugenics are dangerous, what defines what is better? who sets the limits?
Preventing individuals from competing in the evolutionary arena is a crime against nature

File: 1eb556a87028e72fe2291f65d8a795da--blush-makeup-bridal-makeup.jpg (32KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 640x640px

>>3164549
You know his parents were perfectly fine right? He was just a literal freak accident, and shouldn't be used as an indictment against "high breeding" as a whole.

>>3162216
Eugenics is great when it's voluntary and terrible when it's forced on people.
Also, eugenics is probably pretty hard. What dogs are usually healthier, purebreds or mutts?
I'm sure that eugenics works, but it's not easy to figure out what the right breeding is to carry out to create superior genetic material.

>>3164428
"A victim of the cock carousel and sexual liberation"? Dude, if you can't get laid in modern society you probably wouldn't have gotten laid in any society with a more advanced approach to gender relations than Sharia law. No, turning women into literal slaves so you can get your dick wet is not a good idea.
And unless you are actually literally hideous, you have zero excuse. Any man who has even mediocre looks can get laid nowadays.

File: Mad Bean.jpg (586KB, 2500x1667px) Image search: [Google]

586KB, 2500x1667px

>>3164428
The fuck is an incel?

>>3164639
>when the Chicanos roll into town

>>3164571
ayyyyy lmao the english upper crust is literally speciating

>>3164639
involuntary celibate. its polite term for "forever alone neckbeard autist who browses /r9k/"

>>3164428
What you're saying is, even literal mongoloids can figure out how to get laid, and you can't.

>>3162216
I think opinion on Eugenics depends from the question how unethical are you willing to go to improve humanity

I personally think that controlled balance of birthrates and removal of sick units by abortion, before they can feel anything is a small price of making our descendants more intelligent and able to survive

File: Djunga-Djunga-Yunupingu-is-a-senior-Gumatj-elder-of-the-Yolngu-clans.jpg (141KB, 629x700px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 629x700px

>>3162216
>What do you think about eugenics?
In strictly practical terms it's getting the government to interfere with people's right to marry in ways that can't be anything but a human rights shit-show, because you're literally arresting and dragging people out of their own bedrooms.

Theoretically speaking, there are simply too many variables to make selectively breeding humans practical, and the potential for unanticipated long term damage to the human line is too great to ignore.

When you look at dog breeds it becomes pretty obvious that the overwhelming majority of "purebreeds" are inbred as hell and in extremely poor health except for a high pedigreed minority. And even that minority has problems: I remember watching my sister-in-law with her prize winning clumber spaniel which not only was the single dumbest dog I've ever seen, it could not even figure out how to breed: it required humans to inseminate. This would be the fate of humans subjected to selective breeding: a change to superficial, cosmetic features at a severe cost to their overall health.

Breeding cows to have more meat is a relatively simple process: you breed the bigger bull with the bigger cow, it's not that complicated. A human brain, however, is the single most complicated thing in the known universe. Sure, theoretically you could breed humans to have higher intelligence, but it's simply more cost-effective to have a bunch of kind of smart humans collaborating and bringing their different experiences and skillsets to the table than it would be to create a single super-smart human.

Humans don't need help selecting the best mate possible. They're naturally going to gravitate towards the strongest, smartest, and/or most socially capable mate they can find, while lesser desirable literal autists or socially autist /r9k/fattie-cakes like >>3164428 are made to content themselves with celibacy

>>3162216
Ideally, eugenics would just be targeted genetic engineering. Just give every women a few injections while their pregnant and everythings great. No need for sterilization or stop people from breeding.

The technologies still a ways off though.

>>3162216

Wouldn't it be ethically just to ensure that as many humans as possible are born without defects or vulnerability to certain diseases?

>>3164481
You dont sleep with prostitutes, you fuck their disgusting holes and pay them

>>3162216
Within a vacuum it's an alright idea, at least in regards to advancing the human race as a collective, the issue is that "genetic quality" is pretty much subjective, so you can't trust a governing body to enact it.
In order to be implemented, it would have to be voluntary rather than compulsory, something like offering people a lump sum of cash to be irreversibly sterilized, thus ensuring that people who have a dire need for cash (due to either genetic disability, low socioeconomic status, or "low quality genetics" making them unable to earn much) do not produce a child in the same environment, or with the same genetics, that caused them to have such a dire need for money.

>>3162216

Genetic cleanliness is good common sense there is a reason that Pakistanis in Britain only make up 3% of births yet account for 30% of birth defects.

Also there are too many of us artists around nowadays.

>>3162216
Beautiful people should breed, ugly people shouldn't. Simple as that. I personally don't care about ethnicities as long as the man and the woman are healthy and physically attractive.

>A baldie was the main proponent of Eugenics during his time

Lol, even an IQ of 150 has no meaning if you are bald.

>>3162216
Natural Selection is already a form of eugenics.

>>3164551
Civilization is a crime against nature.

>>3162216
Eugenics is good. We need to sterilize the niggers and the shitskins.