Its safe to assume that our root behaviours/desires are largely

>>37885924
Are you out of you mind, you fucking faggot?
Even if (a fucking big if!) we were able to completely kill our empathy and the connection of dopamin/endorphin and social contact, what would you gain? Mega-Autistic Psychopaths of Doom? Do you even know the meaning of the phrase "I can only view far because I am standing on the shoulders of giants", you doublenigger? We humans are FUNDAMENTALLY social animals. That`s LITERALLY how our brain is structured.

Now, I get it. You`re lonely, and you`d like that loneliness to stop. But in my opinion, if you have the ressources to fucking change our very frame of being, our very way of feeling and perceiving, you`d better spend them on a better project.
Like, for example
>higher IQ
>better conceptualising of distances and spaces (today: about 1 mm-2 km, 1 gramm-2 tons, etc.)
>easier regeneration, higher muscle output and higher oxygen-take-in capacity (all already a thing in mice)
>less need for sleep, less problems with serotonin levels (i.e., depression and shit)
>more effective programmability of the unconscious (since we are still basically running around with caveman instincts now)
>brain2computer-interfaces
>programmable muscle memory
>some other stuff

Really, there`s so much fucking potential in genetic science and you fucking dumbass want to use it to go full SEELE and Instrumentality on Humanity`s ass? Really nigger?

>>37886822
>higher IQ
>better conceptualising of distances and spaces (today: about 1 mm-2 km, 1 gramm-2 tons, etc.)
>easier regeneration, higher muscle output and higher oxygen-take-in capacity (all already a thing in mice)
>less need for sleep, less problems with serotonin levels (i.e., depression and shit)
>more effective programmability of the unconscious (since we are still basically running around with caveman instincts now)
>brain2computer-interfaces
>programmable muscle memory
>some other stuff

All of that is great but it means nothing if you have the "human connection" need taking over and fucking everything up. I'm with you for the most part but how are we ever going to get all the things you listed? I'm saying if we remove this giant dagger looming over our head, causing us to waste untold amount of time in pursuit of what? To have someone hover around you? FUCK THAT

I want to get past that and enable us to work on bigger things, like you listed, and for that I believe we need to kill our social genes so we can actually focus and achieve something worthwhile.

>>37886917
>how are we ever going to get all the things you listed
Did you even read my post, you utter fucking moron? Look here
>"I can only view far because I am standing on the shoulders of giants"
That`s Newton, Isaac Newton. Famous physicist, who you never heard of, of course, you no-brain retard. Google "scientific method", maybe you`ll then realize how utterly, UTTERLY FUCKING NONSENSICAL your proposal is.
Again: You can not have progress without cooperation. You can not have value (=what something/someone adds to society) without cooperation. You can not have wealth (which includes the pc you use) without cooperation. You can LITERALLY not survive without cooperation.
Yeah, humans are pieces of shit. Boo fucking hoo, deal with it or an hero. Of course life is hard, dealing with humans is hard, cooperating and making progress is hard and not being an utter moron is hard. But if you want to go somewhere in life, you need other people. And if you want to advance Mankind (which I`d very much like to happen), you fucking need other people.

Of course Life`s hard. But who ever said it was easy, Anon?

>>37885924
It's not entirely biological. It's also

>social
>linguistic
>political

You'd have to change a lot of shit before you could have what you want.

>>37887139
It's not entirely clear what you're refuting desu so I'll try to be a little clearer.

First of all, I'm not advocating that this genetic change be done on EVERYONE, just the one's who feel as if the desire for human connection is hindering them and what they can achieve. Right off the bat, not much would change on societal level, this is purely about individuals. Secondly, I'm not advocating that we ALL forget about each other and live in isolation; let me repeat; this is purely for individuals whose lives are terrible and unproductive due to the need for human connection. Thirdly, all these giants you speak of were largely individuals who spent majority of their lives in complete solitude and communicated with each other through their work. Their traits are anything but normal and they have largely been a result of genetic accident. If possible, would we not want to increase the chance of getting such individuals? Can you imagine Newton having a family with a 9 - 5 or Pascal spending his days chasing tail?

At the end of it all, an individual has many forces/desires acting within him and at different times different forces are the most dominant within him. Given a choice I'd like some control over what these forces are...

>>37885924

Humans wouldn't be human as a result, "connection" is such a broad term anyway you will literally not be able to eradicate it without removing a huge part of human cognitive function to the point where we'll be rendered nothing but slack jawed, cross eyed, retards.

>>37887692
That's an assumption and I'd love to test it out. I don't mind being the guinea pig either if I believed in the quality of research.