scientifically, what is wrong with eugenics?

1.you are in the dark as to what genes you are trying to amplify
2.you are in the dark if they are being amplified at all
3.it's too slow

loss of genetic diversity is a main one. an engineered society would be less able to adapt to a changing environment.

>>8531608
Its a social theory not a scientific one

>>8531608
nothing.

jews have been doing it for centuries.

The only (rather big) scientifc problem is that our understanding of genetics is incomplete.

The worst problem is social: eugenics inevitability becomes hijacked by legitimate racists, who are generally too motivated by ideology to approach eugenics rationally and humanely.

>>8531608
racism, this is not science

>>8531608

Idiots can have genius kids.
Geniuses can have idiot children.
There are great mathematicians of all colors, race, religion, and nationality.

Genetics is a part of biology.
Biologists are not smart.
You should not trust them.

File: Idiocracy-14.jpg (295KB, 704x383px) Image search: [Google]

295KB, 704x383px

>>8531608
>scientifically, what is wrong with eugenics?

nothing.

Actual analysis of the application of eugenics reveals that historically it was mainly applied to prevent those people with severe mental and physical disorders from reproducing.

I advocate for its renewed implementation or we can expect a future like pic related.

Also it is perfectly legal in the USA. BuckVBell was litigated by the supreme court a long time ago.

literally nothing
entirely liberal mindset of muh everyone should be treated equal

it's not very practical at this moment.

>>8531608
It destroys the possibility of superior, non-immediate mutations.

>>8532021
Name one great nig mathematician.
Name one great modern mudslime mathematician.
What's this, you need more time? Take all month. Hell, take all decade. You'll need it.

>>8532198
>It destroys the possibility of superior, non-immediate mutations.

can you elaborate? I tend to think that's fucking stupid but I am open to the idea that you may have some kind of novel insight that I overlooked.

>>8532201
Suppose you need mutation on 2 genes to cause a trait to become active. Also suppose that a mutation on one of those genes alone has visible downsides (for example, gene 1 or gene 2 are negatively correlated with intelligence, but the presence of both gene 1 and gene 2 are positively correlated with it). If you were to practice eugenics such that all gene 1 or gene 2-'s were removed from the gene pool, you would have made the existence of someone with the superior gene 1 + gene 2 genetics almost impossible.

>>8532201
1/10 people of European descent are immune to HIV/AIDS due to a genetic mutation that gained prominence during the black death.

Under Eugenics, such a mutation would have been eliminated and the beneficial effects never known.

There's no saying that eugenics = babies must be EXACTLY like this. Jews already practice eugenics to get rid of Tay Sachs, for example.


Inb4 some grognard spergs out and forgets that eugenics = genetic engineering =/= whatever autistic strawman you can come up with.

>>8532207
>Suppose you need mutation on 2 genes to cause a trait to become active. Also suppose that a mutation on one of those genes alone has visible downsides (for example, gene 1 or gene 2 are negatively correlated with intelligence, but the presence of both gene 1 and gene 2 are positively correlated with it). If you were to practice eugenics such that all gene 1 or gene 2-'s were removed from the gene pool, you would have made the existence of someone with the superior gene 1 + gene 2 genetics almost impossible.

Why not just select for positive mutations?

Wouldn't negative mutations be selected against if Humans, as a species, was still subject to natural selection the way it was up until very modern history?

>>8532200
I stand corrected.

The closest I can get is Persian mathematicians like the recent Fields Medalist Maryam Mirzakhani. Not even sure if she is Muslim. No black mathematicians has ever won one.

Omg. /pol/ was right again.

>>8532212
>Under Eugenics, such a mutation would have been eliminated and the beneficial effects never known.

how would the sexual sterilization of people with severe mental and physical disorders (the traditional and most common use of the practice) have eliminated the mutation for immunity to the plague?

>>8532222
You can't "uneugenic" a group, it's unfortunately not how reality works.
The negative mutations would be selected against but usually wouldn't cause the outright death of every single member of the mutation group.

>>8532228
>if I change the definition of eugenics I wiiiiiin!

>>8532235

you do realize that eugenics has been around a lot longer than the knowledge that DNA and gene mutations exist?

I think you have misunderstood eugenics to mean that you should DNA scan the entire population at birth and sterilize anyone with any mutation.

Assuming that's what you think it means you are not only wrong but also very biologically illiterate with respect to genetics.

>>8532231
>You can't "uneugenic" a group, it's unfortunately not how reality works.

What does that even mean and how is it related to what I said?

>>8532231
>The negative mutations would be selected against but usually wouldn't cause the outright death of every single member of the mutation group.

The hypothetical mutation would show up in an individual and be selected against before it ever had a chance to become part of the wider populations genes.

Poor little fella got born with a mutation that makes him dumber and or physically inferior to typical members of his population. Poor little fella is either probably gonna get eaten by a predator or fail to reproduce and that will be the end of that bad mutations existence.

Not to mention that Eugenics isn't a practice by where all the people have their DNA scanned at birth and are sterilized if they have any mutations.

>>8532242
Please go be inbred somewhere else.

>>8532356
>Please go be inbred somewhere else.

sounds like someone is a little upset feeling stupid today.

>>8531608
eugenics is slow as fuck
while it might have worked in ancient greek becouse tech was also slow as fuck, now technology is advanceing so fast eugenics just falls behind

tho in superintelligence there a mention of a technology that whould greatly increase the speed, by not waiting for the fetus to meature before making it replicate
(oversimplified) so you get a generation in 4ish mounths instead of like minumum 16 years with standart eugenics

>>8531617
Humans primarily evolve their behavior, not their physiology. It's why people in radical areas usually have only minor of physical adaptations to their surroundings, ie, the nepalese having a superiority to living at high altitude in terms of oxygen use efficiency, but not a layer of blubber or heavy fur.

Eugenics is,ultimately, outmoded. We can change the DNA of beings more and more freely onw, if we can find and replace the genes that cause susceptibility to cancer, or improve brain function or heart health, why not apply that benefit broadly? Why not lift the genetically deficient up to greatness, instead of seeking to control them through some draconian breeding program?

>>8532200
J Ernest Wilkins
Abdus Salam

>>8532235
>>8532356
Not him but you're retarded and autistic.

>>8532499
Sure, but behavioral plasticity is still genetically determined

>>8532674
Wilkins is 200% white and a physicist, not a mathematician, and also not successful by any metric. Abdus is pooinloo and not mudslime, but he's actually successful.
Although I meant (and should have said) arab, not mudslime.

>>8532698
>>8532698
Not him, but you're inbred or lobotomized.

>>8532499
>Humans primarily evolve their behavior
Lrn2evolution fgt pls

>>8531636

why don't they cure their baldness and ugliness then?

>>8531608
>scientifically, what is wrong with eugenics?

Who decides what traits are "Desirable"

I have a hint for you.... Eugenics is already being practiced, but intelligence isn't desired in the general population.

>>8532934
>intelligence isn't desired *in the general population.

*for

ftfm

File: seeing_like_a_state.jpg (6KB, 180x293px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 180x293px

>>8531608

>>8531608
>genetic engineering Policy
>enginering and politics
>IMPLYING ITS SCIENCE
NON THEORIC FIELD GET OUT REEEEEEEEE

>>8531608
Your goals.

>Religion, Politics
Your tree has cancer.

>>8531608
Unfeasibly difficult, even if any scientific basis can be found on which to base a program