[paydayloanfasters]

I hear what you say Drogomir. You may wish to fix terrible diseases. But when you open this door, you open the door to Pandora's box. Somebody, someday, may wish to selectively eliminate people born disfigured that are costly to repair,or that are unattractive. Somebody, someday, may wish to eliminate people of a certain height, weight, age, etc.

I think how one does it can make a difference. If you give this power to the government it can't lead to anything good.

[JewJoleSole]

It would suck! Everyone will choose the same traits for their children, and humanity will end up being a heap of inbred people. Besides, how can we know what are the most adaptive traits? For instance, a negrito could be the best genotype for times of hunger. Likewise, a tall, slender, and dark African is best suited for the tropics than a bulky, red-haired viking, whereas the opposite is true for the North Pole. Have you seen the movie "Gattaca"? It's quite illustrative.

Gattaca, even though a quite watchable movie, has a fundamentally flawed premise i.e. that human spirit/endeavour and ‘selected genetically engineered traits’ are mutually exclusive, which they obviously are not.
Even if you hypothetically consider human spirit/endeavour to be a 'ghost in the machine' then this doesn't exclude the usefulness of having a superior (genetically engineered) machine.
And if you consider human spirit/endeavour to be genetic (which is most certainly is) then this trait can be genetically engineered for.

[S.T.D.]

Gattaca, even though a quite watchable movie, has a fundamentally flawed premise i.e. that human spirit/endeavour and ‘selected genetically engineered traits’ are mutually exclusive, which they obviously are not.
Even if you hypothetically consider human spirit/endeavour to be a 'ghost in the machine' then this doesn't exclude the usefulness of having a superior (genetically engineered) machine.
And if you consider human spirit/endeavour to be genetic (which is most certainly is) then this trait can be genetically engineered for.

The crave for success that the main character of Gattaca show during the whole movie cannot be hereditary. The sons of millionaires are usually indolent.

[HedgeYourBets]

I think how one does it can make a difference. If you give this power to the government it can't lead to anything good.

I agree with that. In the end, though, there will be those who decide how humanity should be shaped, and those on the receiving end being shaped. I don't trust that kind of power with any person. How many people exist who are so full of integrity that you would trust your life, and the life of your loved ones, to them? And, if they do exist, who must they answer to for their livelihood and very existence, perhaps, and what kind of integrity will that person(s) have?

[agiopwer]

I think how one does it can make a difference. If you give this power to the government it can't lead to anything good.

But of course that the government will be in charge of planning and carrying out the eugenics programs. Who else? Now, what kind of citizens do you think a politician would like to have? Bright, independent citizens, or stupid, manipulable ones? I would say that most certainly they will prefer the latter over the former.

[BorBitExatini]

well, now we have some form of eugenics also, because the dumb people are getting more children than intelligent men, and getting more help from government aids, when in a natural environment they would be the first to die out..

Dysgenics.

[AlexanderDrew]

well, now we have some form of eugenics also, because the dumb people are getting more children than intelligent men, and getting more help from government aids, when in a natural environment they would be the first to die out..

If they manage to have comparatively more children in their current context - namely, modern states with highly developed social security systems -, and those children manage to reach reproductive age, then these 'dumb people' are clearly superior in the purely evolutionary sense of the word. That's all that matters. Everything else is irrelevant moralism.

[ssiikmuz]

If they manage to have comparatively more children in their current context - namely, modern states with highly developed social security systems -, and those children manage to reach reproductive age, then these 'dumb people' are clearly superior in the purely evolutionary sense of the word. That's all that matters. Everything else is irrelevant moralism.

You can use the term 'moralism.' I might use 'ethics' and 'integrity,' but when those notions are removed from a society civilization will deteriorate to nothing. Sure, it is a challenge to deal with notions like morals and ethics, and people, often get them wrong. But removing such ideas is really the easy way out. More precisely, to pretend that they have been removed is the easy way out. Every person, whether religious, secularist, or anarchist, has a moral compass based upon their beliefs. Every crucial decision we make is based on a value system, our value system. To pretend this concept has been removed is naive. There will always be the Mengeles of the world. The Mengeles will find their way into power, and impose their belief system on others, especially when others are operating from the perspective that there is no moral system in play. It is a one sided fight when only one combatant has a weapon.

[dogdesign]

If they manage to have comparatively more children in their current context - namely, modern states with highly developed social security systems -, and those children manage to reach reproductive age, then these 'dumb people' are clearly superior in the purely evolutionary sense of the word. That's all that matters. Everything else is irrelevant moralism.

Not in the long run. If you could put fast forward you will notice how those "dumb people" is more likely to disappear than the smart people with family planing.

Take a look to this study: Conway's Game of Life.
It is a model to study the reproductive patterns of the life, it shows that many is not always better. The best is the equilibrium.

Rules:

• At each step in time, the following transitions occur:
• Any live cell with fewer than two live neighbours dies, as if caused by under-population.
• Any live cell with two or three live neighbours lives on to the next generation.
• Any live cell with more than three live neighbours dies, as if by overcrowding.
• Any dead cell with exactly three live neighbours becomes a live cell, as if by reproduction.

In the implementation we can see how the numerous colonies disappear very fast in the long run