« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3 4   Go Down

Eugenics

  • 90 Replies
  • 26449 Views
*

divito the truthist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 6901
  • +0/-0
  • Relativist, Existentialist, Nihilist
Eugenics
« on: November 27, 2008, 12:28:37 AM »
Yay, or nay?

Personally, it's hard to argue against the science (given the proof on display), but social customs seemed to shift radically throughout the 20th century.
« Last Edit: November 27, 2008, 12:45:33 AM by divito the truthist »
Logged
Quote from: Proleg on April 22, 2009, 08:50:08 AM
Our existentialist, relativist, nihilist, determinist, fascist, eugenicist moderator hath returned.
Quote from: Fortuna
objectively good
?

T.T. Monsieur

Re: Eugenics
« Reply #1 on: November 27, 2008, 12:36:14 AM »
What? Like forced sterilization?
Logged
*

divito the truthist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 6901
  • +0/-0
  • Relativist, Existentialist, Nihilist
Re: Eugenics
« Reply #2 on: November 27, 2008, 12:45:21 AM »
By any means. Obviously forced sterilization is one of the most humane, if one could call it that.
Logged
Quote from: Proleg on April 22, 2009, 08:50:08 AM
Our existentialist, relativist, nihilist, determinist, fascist, eugenicist moderator hath returned.
Quote from: Fortuna
objectively good
?

T.T. Monsieur

Re: Eugenics
« Reply #3 on: November 27, 2008, 12:53:01 AM »
I would say it's still too much of a pseudoscience to be taken seriously.

And there is the ethical considerations involved.
Logged
*

divito the truthist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 6901
  • +0/-0
  • Relativist, Existentialist, Nihilist
Re: Eugenics
« Reply #4 on: November 27, 2008, 01:04:30 AM »
Quote from: T.T. Monsieur on November 27, 2008, 12:53:01 AM
I would say it's still too much of a pseudoscience to be taken seriously.

What about it do you not take serious? Dominant traits are pseudoscience?
Logged
Quote from: Proleg on April 22, 2009, 08:50:08 AM
Our existentialist, relativist, nihilist, determinist, fascist, eugenicist moderator hath returned.
Quote from: Fortuna
objectively good
?

T.T. Monsieur

Re: Eugenics
« Reply #5 on: November 27, 2008, 01:07:41 AM »
No, their attempted regulation is (at least at the moment).
Logged
*

divito the truthist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 6901
  • +0/-0
  • Relativist, Existentialist, Nihilist
Re: Eugenics
« Reply #6 on: November 27, 2008, 01:21:08 AM »
Hmm. So you believe taking two families of pristine health and matching them together holds just as much likelihood in developing disease as matching a family of poor health with a healthy one? Or mixing people of different ethnicity?
Logged
Quote from: Proleg on April 22, 2009, 08:50:08 AM
Our existentialist, relativist, nihilist, determinist, fascist, eugenicist moderator hath returned.
Quote from: Fortuna
objectively good
?

T.T. Monsieur

Re: Eugenics
« Reply #7 on: November 27, 2008, 01:33:01 AM »
Quote from: divito the truthist on November 27, 2008, 01:21:08 AM
Hmm. So you believe taking two families of pristine health and matching them together holds just as much likelihood in developing disease as matching a family of poor health with a healthy one? Or mixing people of different ethnicity?
More study needs to be conducted in the realm of genetics, psychology and sociology before we will be able to tell what "desirable" traits may be bred and which are the result of conditioning. And how does one decide which qualities are beneficial and which are not?
Logged
*

Wendy

  • 18427
  • +0/-0
  • I laugh cus you fake
Re: Eugenics
« Reply #8 on: November 27, 2008, 08:33:58 AM »
Obviously, homosexuality should be bred out. To ensure the survival of the species. ::)
Logged
Quote from: Wendy on December 31, 1969, 04:00:00 PM
Here's an explanation for ya. Lurk moar. Every single point you brought up has been posted, reposted, debated and debunked. There is a search function on this forum, and it is very easy to use.
*

Colonel Gaydafi

  • Spam Moderator
  • Planar Moderator
  • 65234
  • +17/-39
  • Queen of the gays!
Re: Eugenics
« Reply #9 on: November 27, 2008, 09:56:46 AM »
Didn't the Swedes do a bit of eugenics at one point? Forcing steralisation of certain women? I'm sure I remember reading about it when I was researching something
Logged
Quote from: WardoggKC130FE
If Gayer doesn't remember you, you might as well do yourself a favor and become an hero.
Quote from: Raa
there is a difference between touching a muff and putting your hand into it isn't there?
?

T.T. Monsieur

Re: Eugenics
« Reply #10 on: November 27, 2008, 09:59:47 AM »
The Norwegians locked a bunch of kids in mental asylums because their mothers had slept with German soldiers during the occupation. Is that what you were thinking about?
Logged
*

Wendy

  • 18427
  • +0/-0
  • I laugh cus you fake
Re: Eugenics
« Reply #11 on: November 27, 2008, 10:04:29 AM »
No, the Swedes were heavily into eugenics up until the middle of the century, I think. I'm not sure, though. Uppsala univeristy founded an institute for "racial biology" in 1922, which was then renamed in 1959 to the institution for medicinal genetics, and it exists to this day, as a centre for genetic research. We apparently have a proud tradition of being racist penguinbags in Sweden. :-\
« Last Edit: November 27, 2008, 10:10:30 AM by Wendy »
Logged
Quote from: Wendy on December 31, 1969, 04:00:00 PM
Here's an explanation for ya. Lurk moar. Every single point you brought up has been posted, reposted, debated and debunked. There is a search function on this forum, and it is very easy to use.
*

Colonel Gaydafi

  • Spam Moderator
  • Planar Moderator
  • 65234
  • +17/-39
  • Queen of the gays!
Re: Eugenics
« Reply #12 on: November 27, 2008, 10:11:23 AM »
I think being racist penguinbags is a general Nordic thing...
Logged
Quote from: WardoggKC130FE
If Gayer doesn't remember you, you might as well do yourself a favor and become an hero.
Quote from: Raa
there is a difference between touching a muff and putting your hand into it isn't there?
*

Emir Parkreiner

  • 409
  • +0/-0
  • Killer with a conscience.
Re: Eugenics
« Reply #13 on: November 27, 2008, 10:29:48 AM »
How will it be determined what traits are inheritable and which have been learned?
Logged
*

Wendy

  • 18427
  • +0/-0
  • I laugh cus you fake
Re: Eugenics
« Reply #14 on: November 27, 2008, 10:48:14 AM »
Trial and error, perhaps. Or maybe close examination of parents and their children.
Logged
Quote from: Wendy on December 31, 1969, 04:00:00 PM
Here's an explanation for ya. Lurk moar. Every single point you brought up has been posted, reposted, debated and debunked. There is a search function on this forum, and it is very easy to use.
*

Chris Spaghetti

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 12631
  • +0/-4
Re: Eugenics
« Reply #15 on: November 27, 2008, 11:51:19 AM »
We need to do something to stop the future turning out like Idiocracy

Logged
*

Raist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 30499
  • +0/-0
  • The cat in the Matrix
Re: Eugenics
« Reply #16 on: November 27, 2008, 02:26:03 PM »
Quote from: divito the truthist on November 27, 2008, 01:04:30 AM
Quote from: T.T. Monsieur on November 27, 2008, 12:53:01 AM
I would say it's still too much of a pseudoscience to be taken seriously.

What about it do you not take serious? Dominant traits are pseudoscience?

Lulz. Dominant traits including Huntington's disease?

Eugenics is a pseudo science because better is not a scientifically provable idea. Is it better for someone to be able to life twice their body weight, at the expense of years of life and quality of life at the end, or is it better for someone to be intelligent and live forever.

Eugenics is a wet dream perpetuated by people that have no perspective of true biology, or an incomplete misunderstanding at best. A trait that leads to a normal bacterium nearly dying, is also a mutation that will lead to a drug resistant bacteria being able to multiply at the same rate it would without the drug resistant gene.

Better is not a factual concept.
Logged
?

T.T. Monsieur

Re: Eugenics
« Reply #17 on: November 27, 2008, 02:31:41 PM »
But divito is a fascist - and fascists and eugenics go together like nationalism and socialism! :D
Logged
*

Raist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 30499
  • +0/-0
  • The cat in the Matrix
Re: Eugenics
« Reply #18 on: November 27, 2008, 02:34:03 PM »
Quote from: T.T. Monsieur on November 27, 2008, 02:31:41 PM
But divito is a fascist - and fascists and eugenics go together like nationalism and socialism! :D
Well I'm mainly a biologist. I swear biologists must have more cringe moments than the majority of society combined. Everyone assumes that where they left off on biology in the 7th grade gave them a complete understanding of the subject. I was once asked why people in wet climates don't evolve fins, and all I could say was "Same reason you don't"
Logged
*

ﮎingulaЯiτy

  • Arbitrator
  • 9054
  • +0/-0
  • Resident atheist.
Re: Eugenics
« Reply #19 on: November 27, 2008, 04:24:46 PM »
Quote from: divito the truthist on November 27, 2008, 12:28:37 AM
Yay, or nay?
Nay today. Yay tomorrow.
In today's society, you'd be viewed as the next Hitler and assassinated. Society needs to reach the point where they understand it is necessary and they willfully take part. Introducing it now, could be counter productive as far as getting it to happen.
Logged
If I was asked to imagine a perfect deity, I would never invent one that suffers from a multiple personality disorder. Christians get points for originality there.
*

Chris Spaghetti

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 12631
  • +0/-4
Re: Eugenics
« Reply #20 on: November 27, 2008, 04:29:44 PM »
In Britain you need a license to keep a dog yet you can bring a kid into the world no matter how much of a bad idea it might be
Logged
*

Raist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 30499
  • +0/-0
  • The cat in the Matrix
Re: Eugenics
« Reply #21 on: November 27, 2008, 04:40:01 PM »
Quote from: ﮎingulaЯiτy on November 27, 2008, 04:24:46 PM
Quote from: divito the truthist on November 27, 2008, 12:28:37 AM
Yay, or nay?
Nay today. Yay tomorrow.
In today's society, you'd be viewed as the next Hitler and assassinated. Society needs to reach the point where they understand it is necessary and they willfully take part. Introducing it now, could be counter productive as far as getting it to happen.

This statement is stupidity. The basic urge of humanity and any species is to carry on our genes. You will never be able to convince people to not do so, and I believe it would be the greatest atrocity to do so. An interesting result of it would be recessive genes that tag along with genes that are perceived as beneficial, maybe a certain gene responsible for athletics leads to homicidal/suicidal thoughts. I'd lawl when the new master race has a tendency for self mutilation.

The future will be in engineering each child's genes not in preventing people from breeding. The rich will gain what they believe to be perfection, but the poor will be unable to afford this, and will be "normal." This is a much more reasonable result considering genetic engineering, the use of tumerous plasmids, and free markets.
Logged
?

T.T. Monsieur

Re: Eugenics
« Reply #22 on: November 27, 2008, 04:43:09 PM »
Quote from: Raist on November 27, 2008, 04:40:01 PM
I'd lawl when the new master race has a tendency for self mutilation.
Ever heard of the Yuuzhan Vong?
Logged
*

Raist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 30499
  • +0/-0
  • The cat in the Matrix
Re: Eugenics
« Reply #23 on: November 27, 2008, 04:51:23 PM »
Quote from: T.T. Monsieur on November 27, 2008, 04:43:09 PM
Quote from: Raist on November 27, 2008, 04:40:01 PM
I'd lawl when the new master race has a tendency for self mutilation.
Ever heard of the Yuuzhan Vong?

Nope, but wikipedia doesn't mention self mutilation, just a hate of technology and an affinity for engineering parts.
Logged
?

T.T. Monsieur

Re: Eugenics
« Reply #24 on: November 27, 2008, 04:54:06 PM »
Quote from: Raist on November 27, 2008, 04:51:23 PM
Quote from: T.T. Monsieur on November 27, 2008, 04:43:09 PM
Quote from: Raist on November 27, 2008, 04:40:01 PM
I'd lawl when the new master race has a tendency for self mutilation.
Ever heard of the Yuuzhan Vong?

Nope, but wikipedia doesn't mention self mutilation, just a hate of technology and an affinity for engineering parts.
Wookieepedia it.

Or better yet, read the Expanded Universe.
Logged
*

Raist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 30499
  • +0/-0
  • The cat in the Matrix
Re: Eugenics
« Reply #25 on: November 27, 2008, 04:56:56 PM »
Quote from: T.T. Monsieur on November 27, 2008, 04:54:06 PM
Quote from: Raist on November 27, 2008, 04:51:23 PM
Quote from: T.T. Monsieur on November 27, 2008, 04:43:09 PM
Quote from: Raist on November 27, 2008, 04:40:01 PM
I'd lawl when the new master race has a tendency for self mutilation.
Ever heard of the Yuuzhan Vong?

Nope, but wikipedia doesn't mention self mutilation, just a hate of technology and an affinity for engineering parts.
Wookieepedia it.

Or better yet, read the Expanded Universe.
I was in the process, but I was interrupted by school and the lack of a library with fun books. These books are in my library just spread out to the point it is not worth looking for them.
Logged
*

divito the truthist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 6901
  • +0/-0
  • Relativist, Existentialist, Nihilist
Re: Eugenics
« Reply #26 on: November 27, 2008, 07:26:25 PM »
Quote from: ﮎingulaЯiτy on November 27, 2008, 04:24:46 PM
Nay today. Yay tomorrow.
In today's society, you'd be viewed as the next Hitler and assassinated. Society needs to reach the point where they understand it is necessary and they willfully take part. Introducing it now, could be counter productive as far as getting it to happen.

Right. Today's society would never permit it, especially in America's melting pot, where a lot of the problems are. Sweden had it voluntarily (for the majority) up until 1975, but it would be too much to surmount in today's liberalism.

Quote from: Raist on November 27, 2008, 02:26:03 PM
Eugenics is a pseudo science because better is not a scientifically provable idea. Is it better for someone to be able to life twice their body weight, at the expense of years of life and quality of life at the end, or is it better for someone to be intelligent and live forever.

Eugenics was not about "better," is was about heredity. Heredity, the last time I checked, was not pseudoscience. Like I said originally, it's hard to argue against the real-life evidence. It's all about the ethics and the skewing of the science to argue otherwise.
« Last Edit: November 27, 2008, 07:36:27 PM by divito the truthist »
Logged
Quote from: Proleg on April 22, 2009, 08:50:08 AM
Our existentialist, relativist, nihilist, determinist, fascist, eugenicist moderator hath returned.
Quote from: Fortuna
objectively good
?

Agent_0042

  • 1419
  • +0/-0
Re: Eugenics
« Reply #27 on: November 27, 2008, 07:49:04 PM »
Quote from: divito the truthist on November 27, 2008, 07:26:25 PM
Eugenics was not about "better," is was about heredity. Heredity, the last time I checked, was not pseudoscience. Like I said originally, it's hard to argue against the real-life evidence. It's all about the ethics and the skewing of the science to argue otherwise.

Heredity to what end?
Logged
Quote
Can the FAQ...
Yes, it can.
*

divito the truthist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 6901
  • +0/-0
  • Relativist, Existentialist, Nihilist
Re: Eugenics
« Reply #28 on: November 27, 2008, 07:59:27 PM »
To abolish hereditary mental deficiency and disease. We already know plenty about heredity, it's just a matter of time before genetics makes more progress and makes the idea of eugenics more prominent. It already exists worldwide, but in a more passive form.
« Last Edit: November 27, 2008, 08:02:06 PM by divito the truthist »
Logged
Quote from: Proleg on April 22, 2009, 08:50:08 AM
Our existentialist, relativist, nihilist, determinist, fascist, eugenicist moderator hath returned.
Quote from: Fortuna
objectively good
?

Agent_0042

  • 1419
  • +0/-0
Re: Eugenics
« Reply #29 on: November 27, 2008, 08:14:43 PM »
And how exactly do you decide what is a deficiency or disease?
Logged
Quote
Can the FAQ...
Yes, it can.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4   Go Up
« previous next »