Does very high IQ lead to obsession with eugenics?

**Blue Towlie** · 02-09-2008, 02:33 AM

I've seen five different people on online message boards now that are obsessed with eugenics. All five claim to have MENSA IQ, none lower than 140. I believe them and so does pretty much everyone on each message board. They are definitely in the top percent of the population.

But all of them obsess with eugenics. It makes me think, are all people with high IQs like this? If they are, maybe eugenics is right? What would society be like if people were only like these individuals?

Being of slightly above average IQ (according to an actual test not online ones), these people tend to worry me. I don't like their view of society for the future. It is good intentioned but it reaks of "slippery-slope".

Thoughts?

**Paragon** · 02-09-2008, 05:55 AM


	none lower than 140

which SD?


	Thoughts?

I think eugenics can be a good thing for the human society. But I don't know very much about eugenics.

**Zilal** · 02-09-2008, 07:31 AM

I suspect it goes like this... the people who score highest on IQ tests tend to have particular kinds of minds--that is, honestly, INTJ-ish minds, high on appreciation of theories and systems. If these people also have underdeveloped secondary functions, they can become a little too interested in theories... conspiracy theories, eugenics, etc., disregarding reality in favor of their ideas about how things "should" work.

So it isn't so much that it's these people's intelligence that's leading them to support eugenics. It's their particular type of intelligence coupled with immature or lopsided development. Heh. Don't I sound superior!

**thod** · 02-09-2008, 08:33 AM


	Being of slightly above average IQ (according to an actual test not online ones), these people tend to worry me. I don't like their view of society for the future. It is good intentioned but it reaks of "slippery-slope".

Do not worry, everything will alright. There will work for the semi morons too. They will be set to work cleaning drains with their tongues, and be engineered to be happy about doing it.

All creatures speciate given enough time. We humans will go the same way. This future is inevitable. You too shall serve in time.

**Kotetsu** · 02-09-2008, 09:08 AM

Brave New World reference?

**coffeeloverfreak** · 02-09-2008, 09:35 AM

Nah, I think there are people like that of every IQ. It's only the very high IQ element who dress their beliefs up under the cloaks of "eugenics" or other quasi-scientific attempts at rationalizing or justifying them. The rest are just your garden variety dumbshit racists and intolerant idiots.

**Rick** · 02-09-2008, 09:51 AM

Hmmm. At next week's super secret Mensa "take over the world" meeting, I'll have to let them know the word is out.

Really, I've never seen eugenics discussions on the Mensa messageboards. I have seen them here.

I don't see breeding people for specific traits, whether it is high IQ or anything else. Actually, I believe an extremely high IQ is as much a handicap as a benefit. The more exclusive high IQ societies tend to be, to an extent, psychological support organizations. Lots of these people tend toward social isolation, and they need the network. I'm sure eugenics comes up as does any intellectual topic, but, really, it isn't anything that is given merit. Those people, as a rule, are not interested in power over others.

**mabts** · 02-09-2008, 11:43 AM

High IQ, in conjunction with an extremely objective personality type, such as INTJ, will certainly lead to a fascination with eugenics and IQ. Any objective look at the world will lead one to realize that those on the lower end of the IQ bell curve in modern industrial society are far more likely to be criminals, unemployed, have numerous children with different people, make less money, and generally live in chaos.

Most of the problems in politics and economics are how to reconcile equal rights and legislation with the clear fact that people do not have equal intellectual ability. And while basically no one ever talks about it, most people, in their heart of hearts, know this to be the truth.

**Rick** · 02-09-2008, 12:22 PM

Mabts, your post made me think.

There is a subconscious distinction you touched upon.

There are those who thrive in chaos including some who cannot create order in chaos. There are also those in that conditon that could do better, but become predators instead. Isn't creating order in the midst of chaos an intellectual activity?

If there's any doubt, I'm agreeing with you.

**DeadSpace** · 02-09-2008, 12:35 PM

I do believe in some genetic modification...but only for genetic diseases. Random selection has done a great job for a very long time, imprecise, can have seriously flawed outcomes (cf: spears, p.hilton, etc). But overall works quite well.
Slippery slope indeed, while there is an undeniable allure to an ordered rational society, seems it would also be an incredibly boring world to live in. Knowing each day how you're friends/co-workers will act, what they'll say...bleh. Random is good.

**mabts** · 02-09-2008, 12:43 PM

Rick,

Someone once asked me what I thought intelligence was and I said it was the ability to bring order to chaos.

In terms of political/societal chaos, in which I was speaking of, it seems virtually everyone prefers stable governments/economies/justice systems over Hobbesian madness, whether extremely intelligent or inept.

Deadspace,

I've often heard this argument, that an intelligently engineered society would be boring and fruitless. I couldn't possible disagree more and there is no reason to think this is true. People with high IQs tend to have distinct personalities, not to follow the herd, and be very diverse in their interests and opinions on things. The reason we have so little diversity of views in our society is because most people's intellectual abilities are so low that they just believe whatever the prevailing and acceptable views of society are.

**Rick** · 02-09-2008, 12:48 PM

Within our society, the majority are currently in denial.

**thod** · 02-09-2008, 12:52 PM


	those on the lower end of the IQ bell curve in modern industrial society are far more likely to be criminals, unemployed, have numerous children with different people, make less money, and generally live in chaos

They are better adapted to their environment. They can produce more offspring whilst doing less work. Since none of the offspring perish they are the fitter and will leave more offspring into the next generation.

You were never meant to be evolutionarily successful. You are neuter service creatures created to ensure the breeding success of others. Each tribe produces a small number of INTJ's. Your efforts increase the breeding success of the tribe as a whole. You are as specialised as the soldier ant, which likewise serves its function to the nest.

**DeadSpace** · 02-09-2008, 12:59 PM

Originally Posted by mabts
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Rick,

Someone once asked me what I thought intelligence was and I said it was the ability to bring order to chaos.

In terms of political/societal chaos, in which I was speaking of, it seems virtually everyone prefers stable governments/economies/justice systems over Hobbesian madness, whether extremely intelligent or inept.

Deadspace,

I've often heard this argument, that an intelligently engineered society would be boring and fruitless. I couldn't possible disagree more and there is no reason to think this is true. People with high IQs tend to have distinct personalities, not to follow the herd, and be very diverse in their interests and opinions on things. The reason we have so little diversity of views in our society is because most people's intellectual abilities are so low that they just believe whatever the prevailing and acceptable views of society are.

Problem with that is...completely rational society would boil down to the exact right way to do everything. No diversity OR divergence. Why would they need to? their methods work...everytime, without fail. Art, Music, emotion...all quite useless. In fact...people waste an incredible amout of time on those three, speaking from a purely logical perspective. Love would be pointless, procreation would be entirely artficial. Why take chances? That's logic, what a pure rational society would devolve too. Risk assesment would control all major decisions, and minor ones as well. Time/schedule per individual society member would be carefully refined to produce maximum output. No one would complain...it would simply be efficient. No reason to complain...it's rational...it works. No differing opinions...because there would be nothing to have opinions about. Extreme? not really, one factor guides the scenerio...efficiency, that would guide the society towards logic...and produce those changes.

**mabts** · 02-09-2008, 01:12 PM

Originally Posted by thod
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

They are better adapted to their environment. They can produce more offspring whilst doing less work. Since none of the offspring perish they are the fitter and will leave more offspring into the next generation.

You were never meant to be evolutionarily successful. You are neuter service creatures created to ensure the breeding success of others. Each tribe produces a small number of INTJ's. Your efforts increase the breeding success of the tribe as a whole. You are as specialised as the soldier ant, which likewise serves its function to the nest.

Are you implying that the evolutionary structure of nature is always right or what should be sought after? While those on the lower end of the IQ curve may be breeding more, are they "winning?" Should smart people strive to breed as much as possible? I fail to see what your point is.

mabts added to this post, 6 minutes and 40 seconds later...

Originally Posted by DeadSpace
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Problem with that is...completely rational society would boil down to the exact right way to do everything. No diversity OR divergence. Why would they need to? their methods work...everytime, without fail. Art, Music, emotion...all quite useless. In fact...people waste an incredible amout of time on those three, speaking from a purely logical perspective. Love would be pointless, procreation would be entirely artficial. Why take chances? That's logic, what a pure rational society would devolve too. Risk assesment would control all major decisions, and minor ones as well. Time/schedule per individual society member would be carefully refined to produce maximum output. No one would complain...it would simply be efficient. No reason to complain...it's rational...it works. No differing opinions...because there would be nothing to have opinions about. Extreme? not really, one factor guides the scenerio...efficiency, that would guide the society towards logic...and produce those changes.

I think you're confusing high IQ with perfect rationality. You act as if high IQ would turn everyone into these perfect functioning robots who only make perfectly calculated decisions. Why? Look at the diversity in personality and actions of geniuses; Einstein and Tesla, Schopenhauer and Nietzsche, Goethe and Schopenhauer, Plato and Aristotle, Kant and Hegel, Daunte and Shakespeare, Mozart and Beethoven. While all of these people were insanely intelligent, in terms of personality and interests, they were also remarkably different.

You're completely mechanistic view of the world, the idea that as IQ goes up, people become robotic, and art, music, and love are to be rejected is completely insane. The problem with most modern scientists/engineers is their foolishness in rejecting the arts and love. True intelligence realizes the extreme value of these things.

**denaria** · 02-09-2008, 01:48 PM

Eugenics doesn't work anyway - it's the wonders of meiosis. As it happens dear husband and I have a combined IQ of well over 300. One child has an IQ of 115, the other 130. Fine, but nothing earth shattering. And before you ask, it's too late to try again
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
.

**DeadSpace** · 02-09-2008, 02:13 PM

Originally Posted by mabts
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I think you're confusing high IQ with perfect rationality. You act as if high IQ would turn everyone into these perfect functioning robots who only make perfectly calculated decisions. Why? Look at the diversity in personality and actions of geniuses; Einstein and Tesla, Schopenhauer and Nietzsche, Goethe and Schopenhauer, Plato and Aristotle, Kant and Hegel, Daunte and Shakespeare, Mozart and Beethoven. While all of these people were insanely intelligent, in terms of personality and interests, they were also remarkably different.

You're completely mechanistic view of the world, the idea that as IQ goes up, people become robotic, and art, music, and love are to be rejected is completely insane. The problem with most modern scientists/engineers is their foolishness in rejecting the arts and love. True intelligence realizes the extreme value of these things.

no, i value those things, did not assume anything, you however did i do have a fairly high IQ. Logically...once you start meddling to make society better...you have to modify those things that cause friction, for a smoothly flowing society. In my statement i leaped far ahead. Changes would start out small, unnoticible at first nearly. But as with any human endeavor towards perfection, they would quickly escalate. Art, Music, Emotion are not inherently valuable, and in fact, their 'value' varies wildly from individual to individual. all three produce an emotional response, take time from more productive endeavors, and furthermore, quite often lead to conflict. Rationally, conflict should be avoided as it works directly against a smooth running society, ergo thoughts, ideas, non-uniformity of purpose and plan would be eliminated, homogenised. So that everyone would have one mind on a subject = no conflict, smooth running society.
I enjoy music, art, and emotion. Differing opinions to mine own. But logically, i would be more productive without those. Eugenics is about making perfection, those babies grow up, become adults...and think of further ways to improve the next generation, and the next improves the next...ad infinitum.
Weeding out continually, qualities they believe are detrimental. How many generations do you think it would take before everything that caused conflict among humans was eliminated? It is the most rational goal.

**ssfanatic** · 02-09-2008, 02:33 PM

	Originally Posted by Blue Towlie To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Being of slightly above average IQ (according to an actual test not online ones), these people tend to worry me. I don't like their view of society for the future. It is good intentioned but it reaks of "slippery-slope".

I can see the xxFx in you coming out in that statement.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
I dont see whats wrong with it. I dont want to get on a debate of abortion, but if it comes to aborting a child bec they have a defect, then i disagree. But would it not make the world a more peaceful and intelligent place to live. According to Voltaire, "Common sense is not so common" Oh how true. Just imagine if, not intelligence, the whole world had common sense. The dream of mankind
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

**Alpha Prime** · 02-09-2008, 03:02 PM

People are all obsessed with eugenics, most on an unconscious, natural level, which is good.

**mabts** · 02-09-2008, 03:06 PM

	Originally Posted by denaria To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Eugenics doesn't work anyway - it's the wonders of meiosis. As it happens dear husband and I have a combined IQ of well over 300. One child has an IQ of 115, the other 130. Fine, but nothing earth shattering. And before you ask, it's too late to try again To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. .

That's why the genetic IQ deviations are on a bell curve. You and you're husband are more likely to have a child with a higher IQ than two people with a combined IQ of 200, but it isn't guaranteed that you will.

mabts added to this post, 1 minutes and 44 seconds later...

Originally Posted by DeadSpace
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

no, i value those things, did not assume anything, you however did i do have a fairly high IQ. Logically...once you start meddling to make society better...you have to modify those things that cause friction, for a smoothly flowing society. In my statement i leaped far ahead. Changes would start out small, unnoticible at first nearly. But as with any human endeavor towards perfection, they would quickly escalate. Art, Music, Emotion are not inherently valuable, and in fact, their 'value' varies wildly from individual to individual. all three produce an emotional response, take time from more productive endeavors, and furthermore, quite often lead to conflict. Rationally, conflict should be avoided as it works directly against a smooth running society, ergo thoughts, ideas, non-uniformity of purpose and plan would be eliminated, homogenised. So that everyone would have one mind on a subject = no conflict, smooth running society.
I enjoy music, art, and emotion. Differing opinions to mine own. But logically, i would be more productive without those. Eugenics is about making perfection, those babies grow up, become adults...and think of further ways to improve the next generation, and the next improves the next...ad infinitum.
Weeding out continually, qualities they believe are detrimental. How many generations do you think it would take before everything that caused conflict among humans was eliminated? It is the most rational goal.

Ah, I see. We're talking about two different notions of eugenics. The eugenics which I am speaking of are in the tradition of William Shockley i.e. concerned with the average IQ of the population and ways in which it could be improved.

**Colette** · 02-09-2008, 03:18 PM

	Originally Posted by Blue Towlie To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Being of slightly above average IQ (according to an actual test not online ones), these people tend to worry me. I don't like their view of society for the future. It is good intentioned but it reaks of "slippery-slope". Thoughts?

My thoughts are that why do we need to have a society consisting only of self-ordained 'highly intelligent people'? What possible advantage could be derived from restricting the human race (or a particular population subset) to such IQ-based evolutionary engineering? I'm afraid the proponents of Eugenics fall almost exclusively into the mindset of people who cannot or will not tolerate people who are different from themselves, and who cannot appreciate the positive qualities or contributions of anyone who is different. I personally don't think we ought to be breeding a proliferation of such people.

On a slight aside, I'm also unable to comprehend how it is that a large number of people (especially, it seems, forum goers) appear to regard 'high intelligence' as an inherent social good; to be aspired to in all people, and used as a basis for ignoring or diminishing those who do not share it. Can anyone explain to me the thinking behind such assumptions?

**mabts** · 02-09-2008, 03:53 PM

Originally Posted by Colette
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

My thoughts are that why do we need to have a society consisting only of self-ordained 'highly intelligent people'? What possible advantage could be derived from restricting the human race (or a particular population subset) to such IQ-based evolutionary engineering? I'm afraid the proponents of Eugenics fall almost exclusively into the mindset of people who cannot or will not tolerate people who are different from themselves, and who cannot appreciate the positive qualities or contributions of anyone who is different. I personally don't think we ought to be breeding a proliferation of such people.

On a slight aside, I'm also unable to comprehend how it is that a large number of people (especially, it seems, forum goers) appear to regard 'high intelligence' as an inherent social good; to be aspired to in all people, and used as a basis for ignoring or diminishing those who do not share it. Can anyone explain to me the thinking behind such assumptions?

Statistical Facts:

IQ <75 75-90 90-110 110-125 >125
US population distribution 5 20 50 20 5
Married by age 30 72 81 81 72 67
Out of labor force more than
1 month out of year (men) 22 19 15 14 10
Unemployed more than 1
month out of year (men) 12 10 7 7 2
Divorced in 5 years 21 22 23 15 9
% of children w/ IQ in
bottom decile (mothers) 39 17 6 7 -
Had an illegitimate baby
(mothers) 32 17 8 4 2
Lives in poverty 30 16 6 3 2
Ever incarcerated (men) 7 7 3 1 0
Chronic welfare recipient
(mothers) 31 17 8 2 0
High school dropout 55 35 6 0.4 0

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

1) I would never support government mandated or forced eugenics.
2) I'm not intolerant of people with average or low IQs or any sort of IQ. I judge people by their character. But, people with very low IQs have trouble functioning in society, getting jobs, staying out of jail, or having any sort of life stability. Because I am not cruel or some sort of theist who doesn't believe in changing "God's creation," I think it would be preferable for people to not be born with such a genetic burden.

**Colette** · 02-09-2008, 06:27 PM

mabts: I can assure you that low functioning and criminal and deliquent behaviour, is not confined to those with a low IQ. Such behaviour simply manifests itself in different ways. To that extent I find your argument in favour of Eugenics to be somewhat disingenuous and untenable.

**ssfanatic** · 02-09-2008, 09:57 PM

We can all sit here and talk about how great this is, but how would a government ever administer this. There is no way this would ever go over in any country. Maybe Cuba, thats about it. And if it a government DID start a eugenics program, i would bet a pretty penny that the UN would shut it down. There would have to be blood shed, and it would have to happen either secretly (third world country) or a larger conflict (i.e. world war) would have to cover it up.
Thoughts?

**OneBadMother** · 02-10-2008, 02:01 AM

I think that we should hold off on eugenics until we have a significantly greater understanding of how the human mind works, combined with a better understanding of how mental traits are passed down from generation to generation. Plus, what kind of eugenics are we talking about? Having people selected to breed, or genetic engineering in the lab? No matter which one it is, isn't it better for human survival to have a more diverse gene pool? We might run the risk of becoming as overspecialized as pandas and koalas otherwise.

02-09-2008, 02:33 AM	#1
Blue Towlie Banned MBTI: INFJ Join Date: Feb 2008 Posts: 15	I've seen five different people on online message boards now that are obsessed with eugenics. All five claim to have MENSA IQ, none lower than 140. I believe them and so does pretty much everyone on each message board. They are definitely in the top percent of the population. But all of them obsess with eugenics. It makes me think, are all people with high IQs like this? If they are, maybe eugenics is right? What would society be like if people were only like these individuals? Being of slightly above average IQ (according to an actual test not online ones), these people tend to worry me. I don't like their view of society for the future. It is good intentioned but it reaks of "slippery-slope". Thoughts?
Blue Towlie is offline post a comment

02-09-2008, 07:31 AM	#3
Zilal Member [23%] MBTI: INTJ Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 949	I suspect it goes like this... the people who score highest on IQ tests tend to have particular kinds of minds--that is, honestly, INTJ-ish minds, high on appreciation of theories and systems. If these people also have underdeveloped secondary functions, they can become a little too interested in theories... conspiracy theories, eugenics, etc., disregarding reality in favor of their ideas about how things "should" work. So it isn't so much that it's these people's intelligence that's leading them to support eugenics. It's their particular type of intelligence coupled with immature or lopsided development. Heh. Don't I sound superior!
Zilal is offline post a comment

02-09-2008, 09:08 AM	#5
Kotetsu Member [03%] MBTI: INTJ Join Date: Feb 2008 Posts: 140	Brave New World reference?
Kotetsu is offline post a comment

02-09-2008, 09:35 AM	#6
coffeeloverfreak Member [09%] MBTI: INTJ Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 391	Nah, I think there are people like that of every IQ. It's only the very high IQ element who dress their beliefs up under the cloaks of "eugenics" or other quasi-scientific attempts at rationalizing or justifying them. The rest are just your garden variety dumbshit racists and intolerant idiots.
coffeeloverfreak is offline post a comment

02-09-2008, 09:51 AM	#7
Rick Member [05%] MBTI: INTJ Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 234	Hmmm. At next week's super secret Mensa "take over the world" meeting, I'll have to let them know the word is out. Really, I've never seen eugenics discussions on the Mensa messageboards. I have seen them here. I don't see breeding people for specific traits, whether it is high IQ or anything else. Actually, I believe an extremely high IQ is as much a handicap as a benefit. The more exclusive high IQ societies tend to be, to an extent, psychological support organizations. Lots of these people tend toward social isolation, and they need the network. I'm sure eugenics comes up as does any intellectual topic, but, really, it isn't anything that is given merit. Those people, as a rule, are not interested in power over others.
Rick is offline post a comment

02-09-2008, 11:43 AM	#8
mabts New Member [01%] MBTI: INTJ Join Date: Feb 2008 Posts: 61	High IQ, in conjunction with an extremely objective personality type, such as INTJ, will certainly lead to a fascination with eugenics and IQ. Any objective look at the world will lead one to realize that those on the lower end of the IQ bell curve in modern industrial society are far more likely to be criminals, unemployed, have numerous children with different people, make less money, and generally live in chaos. Most of the problems in politics and economics are how to reconcile equal rights and legislation with the clear fact that people do not have equal intellectual ability. And while basically no one ever talks about it, most people, in their heart of hearts, know this to be the truth.
mabts is offline post a comment

02-09-2008, 12:22 PM	#9
Rick Member [05%] MBTI: INTJ Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 234	Mabts, your post made me think. There is a subconscious distinction you touched upon. There are those who thrive in chaos including some who cannot create order in chaos. There are also those in that conditon that could do better, but become predators instead. Isn't creating order in the midst of chaos an intellectual activity? If there's any doubt, I'm agreeing with you.
Rick is offline post a comment

02-09-2008, 12:35 PM	#10
DeadSpace Member [08%] MBTI: INTJ Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 352	I do believe in some genetic modification...but only for genetic diseases. Random selection has done a great job for a very long time, imprecise, can have seriously flawed outcomes (cf: spears, p.hilton, etc). But overall works quite well. Slippery slope indeed, while there is an undeniable allure to an ordered rational society, seems it would also be an incredibly boring world to live in. Knowing each day how you're friends/co-workers will act, what they'll say...bleh. Random is good.
DeadSpace is offline post a comment

02-09-2008, 12:43 PM	#11
mabts New Member [01%] MBTI: INTJ Join Date: Feb 2008 Posts: 61	Rick, Someone once asked me what I thought intelligence was and I said it was the ability to bring order to chaos. In terms of political/societal chaos, in which I was speaking of, it seems virtually everyone prefers stable governments/economies/justice systems over Hobbesian madness, whether extremely intelligent or inept. Deadspace, I've often heard this argument, that an intelligently engineered society would be boring and fruitless. I couldn't possible disagree more and there is no reason to think this is true. People with high IQs tend to have distinct personalities, not to follow the herd, and be very diverse in their interests and opinions on things. The reason we have so little diversity of views in our society is because most people's intellectual abilities are so low that they just believe whatever the prevailing and acceptable views of society are.
mabts is offline post a comment

02-09-2008, 12:48 PM	#12
Rick Member [05%] MBTI: INTJ Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 234	Within our society, the majority are currently in denial.
Rick is offline post a comment

02-09-2008, 01:48 PM	#16
denaria Member [03%] MBTI: Intx Join Date: Feb 2008 Posts: 130	Eugenics doesn't work anyway - it's the wonders of meiosis. As it happens dear husband and I have a combined IQ of well over 300. One child has an IQ of 115, the other 130. Fine, but nothing earth shattering. And before you ask, it's too late to try again To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. .
denaria is offline post a comment

02-09-2008, 03:02 PM	#19
Alpha Prime Member [03%] MBTI: XXXX Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 153	People are all obsessed with eugenics, most on an unconscious, natural level, which is good.
Alpha Prime is offline post a comment

02-09-2008, 06:27 PM	#23
Colette Member [27%] MBTI: INTJ Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 1,088	mabts: I can assure you that low functioning and criminal and deliquent behaviour, is not confined to those with a low IQ. Such behaviour simply manifests itself in different ways. To that extent I find your argument in favour of Eugenics to be somewhat disingenuous and untenable.
Colette is offline post a comment

02-09-2008, 09:57 PM	#24
ssfanatic Member [14%] MBTI: INTJ Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 566	We can all sit here and talk about how great this is, but how would a government ever administer this. There is no way this would ever go over in any country. Maybe Cuba, thats about it. And if it a government DID start a eugenics program, i would bet a pretty penny that the UN would shut it down. There would have to be blood shed, and it would have to happen either secretly (third world country) or a larger conflict (i.e. world war) would have to cover it up. Thoughts?
ssfanatic is offline post a comment

02-10-2008, 02:01 AM	#25
OneBadMother Member [15%] MBTI: INTP Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 639	I think that we should hold off on eugenics until we have a significantly greater understanding of how the human mind works, combined with a better understanding of how mental traits are passed down from generation to generation. Plus, what kind of eugenics are we talking about? Having people selected to breed, or genetic engineering in the lab? No matter which one it is, isn't it better for human survival to have a more diverse gene pool? We might run the risk of becoming as overspecialized as pandas and koalas otherwise.
OneBadMother is offline post a comment