Well I debated making this thread for about 2-3 days now. But I cant hold my tongue. I sincerely think he had some logic to his idea. although his means were completely irrational the idea of a super race is the way to go IMO. Heres why: The way I see it, genetics is one of the biggest problems within society. A lot of illness and disease are based down generation to generation. shit like AIDs spreads like wildfire. I think if you took people and breed them based on genetic success humans would evolve at an exponential rate. I think one of the problems within society is people "polluting the gene pool" While I agree there is no one with perfect genetics, I think through selective breeding humans would thrive more. It's just common sense IMO that when you continue to breed the best of what a species has to offer, over generations that species will evolve. I didnt articulate this quite the way i wanted to, but hopefully someone will get my point. Good Morning GC. EDIT- not to mention all the behavioral disorders that are linked directly to genetics. IMO if it works with plants and other animals, why not humans?
You are correct, and you will also probably get a healthy dose of hate. You are correct that is probably the best solution in order to breed and make the human race superior, but I dont know if that is a goal. And if it is a goal, which it might be, I can pretty surely say that not many people will be ok with that means.
Yeah society is far too soft to allow for survival of the fittest. society would much rather put stupid, worthless people on the government tit and allow them to suck until it is dry rather than allow nature to run its course.
You should watch a movie called Gattaca it has a pretty similar idea behind it and it is actually pretty good IMO.
the problem with breeding to create an ideal is you remove differences from the population. And because we live in a changing environment those very differences may be what are required to allow the population to survive. Differences that seem irrelevant or even weaknesses today may be the very attributes needed to survive the changes to the environment. I respect your point of view because natural selection is just as callus with the rights of individuals as any program to improve the genetics of a population. Look at all the poor people that have to live their lives in absolute misery due to physical or emotional "imperfections". At least we can make the decision to treat them as the valued members of society that they are. Survival of the fittest is not survival of the richest or the best looking or the strongest, it is merely the survival of those individuals with the best ability to reproduce.
KingPins, I like the topic, very interesting (got my brain going this morning lol thanks) Though you took a major jump in your ideas. Just because if we were to breed the best species doesn't mean money and power wont corrupt them as we see in our current politics..
whoa whoa whoa.. i said nothing about improved genetics improving governments. I guess I just look at animals and how the select few of each species that survives lives to reproduce. if you lived, you obviously had the genes neccessary to survive, so only THOSE species who had good genes could reproduce, this is how animals develop new adaptation skills such as growing a tail over years, or changing color, ect. Im not really completely serious, since the idea really couldnt be achieved, its just more of.. "hey, what if" and ill have to check out that movie, i havent heard of it before. EDIT- I was merely pointing out that governments often take care of people who in nature would just die therefore preventing them from passing their laziness and worthlessness down through society.
Though this has some good parts to it there are also many bad parts. Natural selection in the wild is based on better ability to reproduce in which animals for the most part are completely selfish, however in human society we actually try to contribute to society etc. (although many many humans are still selfish). What if one of the people with "bad genetics" would have invented a cure to cancer and benefited society in general in a way that would greatly outdue their negative genetic impact? Also who determines what the bad genes are (in our constantly changing world), in another post someone said what is seen as bad traits (determined by genetics today) may be very good in the future... And even if not who would decide what genes are good genes. How do you measure success, since natural selection is based on just having the most sex and raising the most healthy kids...? Lastly this is a very brutal approach... Say you didnt have any cures for diseases, which would be a great way to both get rid of diseases and evolve stronger immune systems or mutations that could be very very good (think of the people who have HIV but arent developing AIDS after many many years). But then think that your mom, girlfriend or sister gets bacterial meningitis and you just have to sit there and watch one of your best friends die to "better the human gene pool"... This is like reverting back to the times of caveman and doesn't really apply in our modern technological society.
You act like we would lose all technology if this happened. lol. there would still be modern science.. im not asking to hop in a time machine and do this. idk who would determine good genes.. this isnt a plan its just something ive thought about the last couple nights while being stoned and laying in bed. You make some very good points that i never really thought about. And natural selection isnt just who can reproduce more, thats a complete misunderstanding of natural selection. Its like what happened with rabbits in Upper Canada, originally they were like regular ass rabits, well on snow they stuck out easily and were hunted easily.. well it evolved to become white to match the color of the snow. my whole logic started when i thought about what would happen if you took 2 people with incredible IQ's and people who would be considered masterminds and have them have kids. Id bet my life savings that child is intelligent.
Let me tell you why you are wrong. Every race has different physical traits that generally run within their race. Now, if we didnt have different races for, let's say, 3,000 years, bacteria would become so advanced that it would destroy us nation by nation. Not to mention that bacteria that used to feed on woods (because everything used to be made out of them), will soon start to adapt to feed on plastics, 'melting' your computer chips, heating/cooling systems, everything thats, well, plastic... Theirs a system of check between races imo. Im sure those tiny tiny organisms will at some point surpass the technology that we will be able to come up with... But to do with race- You think AIDS is spreading like wildfire now? Think about all the flus and staph that would soon spread uncontrollably. Our medicines wouldnt protect us for shit either... Just a thought
Ah, my bad! I read your reply wrong..You said government TIT. LOL, yeah ok I see what you are saying there. I think this is happening already. Educated people tend to mate with the educated, but just not as a fast enough pace as what you are proposing. I think its irrelevant, really. I believe Mother Earth is going to take herself back in the VERY near future, and wipe a HUGE amount of the worlds population off the face of her.
Good point, we need variation in the gene pool in order to continue evolving. We have developed these differences due to our wide range of environments. A super race may seem like a good idea, but in reality it would be impossible to do this for the entire human population. Basically the people in the more wealthy countries would be the only ones who could do this, and most of the world would be left out. This would create an even bigger problem in my opinion. Although if you think about it, in the future we're probably going to have a lot less genetic variation that we do now. We may not ever get to the point where everyone is the same race, but we're on the way. Before modern transportation, people of the same ethnic background generally lived in the same area. Caucasians in Europe, Arabs and Jews in the Middle East, Asians in Asia, Africans in Africa, etc. It's only since we've started exploring, immigrating, and stirring everything up that we see such ethnic diversity in one location. Also in the past, people generally bred within their race... and today we see plenty of interracial families. As different populations are dispersed throughout the world and people become mixed together, we're going to see less differences. Maybe if you could fast forward 5000 years or some huge amount of time, you would see that humans as a whole are going to look much more alike.
I agree. I dont think it will be within our lifetime. But probably within our childrens'. and what you said about educated people breeding with other educated people and its success. Thats proof of why it works. The most clear example is with sports. Its rediculous how many players who make it pro have a family member who also played professional sports. Dont they say that humans only use 10% of their brain power or something? This is why I feel greater things could be reached. I think the human mind is much more valuable and powerful than we understand. and anyone who uses pyschedelics could probably confirm that idea.
First of all yes natural selection is completely based on ability to reproduce more succesfully (im a junior in college as a science major), with your rabbit example (keep in mind genes dont evolve to better an animal, there are genetic mutations by random chance some of which will benefit that animal). There are some rabbits living in the white snows of Canada (or wherever). Some rabbits had a genetic mutation (completey on random) that made their coats white... These rabbits were much harder for their predators to find and catch, therefore these rabbits survived longer (on average)... So therefore if they mated once a year and lived longer (as mentioned above) they would produce more offspring than their brown rabbit cousins... Therefore there would be more white rabbits being born than brown rabbits and the race would slowly start to evolve towards having the white coat since it allows for better reproduction abilities (can live longer, easier to raise babies( for example predator cant see mom sitting outside den with babies because they are white, so these babies live whereas the brown ones would have died))... So yes natural selection is completely based on better ability to reproduce successfully, however it can act on various components that enable this better reproductive ability (physical traits, behavioral traits (say the rabbits started eating at night which also would have made it harder for the predator to hunt them) etc.)
Yeah I never really considered on what scale it would be.. Maybe some a village of people who do it.. a country... it definetely wouldnt work on a global scale. like you guys have pointed out every country has different survival needs.
so basicaly you want someone tellin you who you can and cant fuck..that sounds like a world id rather not see happen
again.. im not talking about a plan to ever do it.. its not really possible as i already said. it was aimed at those who are discussing the affects of having a genetically "superior" group of people. yes i know its not possible to go around to every person and determine whether or not they can fuck or not.
Itd be funny if when the government inserts chips into all the infants and society becomes on "the chip" that the government would be able to control a man or womans fertility.. it would definetely be possible... thatd be the extreme of population control.
They logic behind this is severly flawed. There's a reason we don't reproduce asexually, because varied genetics is very favorable. Its like hedging a bet. If everyone has the same awesome genes things would go great for a while, but what happens if a virus comes through and no one is immune to it, then everyone dies and the species is extinct. If you have varied genes, then when that virus comes around, maybe 5% of the population is not affected and the species can live on.
Yes, Hitler was onto something alright. He was Satan's Pogo Pole Dancer, riding the weiner of evil, into the orgasm of eternal death. If you're interested in the results of a long session of very controlled breeding, see the British Royal Family, and tell me if that looks perfected to you. " The White Man's Got A God Complex"......