There is one ethical way to do eugenics with little ethical conflicts that I can think of. Pay childless, fertile women a sum of money, say 1000 dollars a month, which they lose if they get pregnant. Poor women could then choose not to have children, and you would have less poor people. With less poor people you'd have better resources to educate the remainder, and the less motivated people would be weeded out from the gene pool.
I don't think that eugenics is necessarily a bad idea, I think the methods used and the motives behind them (what you objected to) were the mistake. There are equitable ways to go about eugenics, and there are various traits that can be selected for and against.
You seem imagine the worst possible form of eugenics.
Why do you keep saying that eugenics imply sterilization of unfit individuals ?
What about encouraging reproduction by persons with inheritable desirable traits? You can have a eugenics program with volunteers, what is so hard about that ? the rest of the world can mind it's own business, nobody has to sterilize anyone ... damn, where we would be if Hitler had never existed
You can have eugenic while respecting people's freedom, and i dont understand why you didnt approach the subject this way
@wedingo Exactly, the idea of Eugenics is not necessarily a bad one. But as we all know a good idea can be taken to a horrible extreme, dangerous and terrible things can be done with good ideas. There's no reason that Eugenics would have to be coercive or brutal. We don't rule out nuclear power just because the same idea can be used to make a bomb.
I think the world is being treated actively with dysgenics. I am against both dysgenics and eugenics, and would rather people just play "fair". But I think saying this is probably like being against guns because swordfighting was "fair". I guess the real answer is that the world is inherently unfair, and evolution works when unfair tactics are not 100% effective, which is a good thing.
I find it interesting that people think evolution has stopped for humans. In fact we are changing more rapidly than ever before. Birth control is a major factor. It is not random who uses birth control. Please watch the movie Idiocracy. They show how the intelligent/educated people have fewer children and in the future everyone is an idiot (very funny movie).
Great vid, but football has as much functional utility as pissing in the wind. Traditionalized insanity. We should all question eugenics, b/c we're living in a world where we pay people millions to play football: bashing against each other in a ridiculus display of ignorance to the repercussions of long term injury, all the while we know that money is kept from innocent people who are starving to death all over the world.
As a child I was relatively intelligent I guess, I then entered a less popular social group. More intelligent geeks but that made me smarter then came the internet and an explosion of increased intellect because the information was there to spark my curiosity. I think Einstein was dyslexic. Give the mind the right stimulation and watch the light shine. Anyone who says otherwise is lacking themselves and externalising that insecurity on others
Excellent response Phil. I agree with the adopted newborn theory. Most ghetto kids in NYC don't get adopted by Connecticut doctors. So the question stands: as much as it is taboo to ask, should parenthood come with a license? And why seeing a problem and not correcting it is seen as morally acceptable, and intervening as morally reprehensible? As you said, education may be the answer. So I propose licensing parenthood. Want kids? Go learn how to be a decent parent. It is only fair.
UK wealthier? You bunch of dip-poops! Do you really think Eugenics increases GDP and wealth? You need to study and realize the roots of Eugenics and economics! Read Charlotte Izerbyt's book, "The Dumbing down of America." It's done by design you stupid asses! Fluoride, mercury, aspartame, hours of TV, GMO foods! RESEARCH AND LEARN THE TRUTH! STUPIDZ!
Eugenics is not a movement, it is a philosophy which simply states that those who are weak should have less than 2 children, while those who are strong should have more than 2 children
We always forget about the dominant minority of movers and shakers and this planet, the so-called financial elite. Plans to better our society must take into consideration the gatekeepers who have consistently done everything they could to hold us back.
If there is a discussion of "offing" certain undesirable types, be sure to include the royal families of Europe, the banking dynasties and all the heads of organized religion world wide.
how the hell you can think that we can overtake problems just killing 'em? that's not racism, that's idiocy. PROBLEMS, along with human imperfection and sicknesses have leaded the man to study for passing and ovverrun 'em. If we had applied eugenics since the ancient times, now we would have been in the stone age!! cancer research, multiple sclerosis research and the successes of nowdays medicine are just a result of human imperfection and of the willing to solve 'em.
Ok. So we can agree that intelligence is determined both by environmental and genetic factors. However, this does not provide argument against Eugenics. Apathetic parents who do not mentally stimulate their children will usually raise children who are also mentally incompetent and apt to raise their children the exact same way. In this way, stupidity is a hereditary, learned behavior.
Since the most influential behavioral learning comes from parents,why wouldn't sterilization be a good solution?
Eugenics is not a bad thing at all. Infact, I favour it strongly. The UK could become a lot wealthier and more productive if all the chavs who breed like rabbits and claim millions benefits (that we pay for) were thoroughly sterilised.
So you don't believe intelligence is inherited, ie is genetic? I have to disagree there. Also, the idea that our new environment of money favors the intelligent is incorrect (in the main). Yes, there is a new environment created by humanity, but it turns nature on its head. BUT... I don't condone eugenics! I just have to say that perhaps the future is somewhat bleak.
Eugenics used to be done all the time, only not knowingly. Each culture sets a set of characteristics (genotype) which the masses are to consider desireble in a spouse, think of Confucianism or the Old Testament, both works contain Eugenics programs and the cultures which adhered to them prospered, whereas the hedonic cultures are slums.
Thus it ultimately comes down to attitude and tact on the part of men and women everywhere.
i have always thought that if the Romans were still going today maybe they would have put a eugenics system in place a thousand years ago. just think about where we would be right now if they had and where science would be now. my family would not be here, nor would David Beckham's and look what that would have done to the face of US football.... oh yeah...
I like this idea, but I'd not make it mandatory for all individuals. Administration of an IQ test would come first, then if the score was too low for the standards in place the individual would have a reversible procedure conducted on them.
you're an idiot. Killing people because of weak genes isnt the answer. sterilization? kinda extreme. Suggesting aiding in the death of those that some percieve as genetically inferior? fuckin stupid
the spartans live thousands of years ago, and the last person who followed that philosophy you just mentioned was Hitler, he actively killed many thousands of handicapped people.
Only to the degree that everyone should try to find the best WILLING mate to have their children. And that is natural selection which is what evolution is all about trying every possible approach and seeing not works.
Yes humans have created their own environment detatched from the natural one. However it is not an environment conducive to creating better people (creative, intelligent, healthy, non-resentful towards reality) but instead favours ruthless, bureaucratic, passive-aggressive people ill-equipped to deal with the wider reality which will always and inevitably encompass human life.
What we get rated for is what we publicly display of ourselves, not the whole picture. How dare some of you people rate your fellow humans as lesser (and in the eyes of eugenics, unwanted) based on their public display? Don't you see, this is putting yourself in the role of the king sentecing the least able performer in his court to be eaten by the lions, simple because it "wasn't up to his standard". Hypocrites!
sorry-but i support the 'hellenic ideal':healthy mind in a healthy body! the guy on the video looks like a typical egghead for me.maybe intelligent-but somehow degenerated!
Yes every person is entitled to a quality education. But someone completing a degree and even doing well in it does not mean they are intelligent. If you have a good memory you can do well in studies...and i've seen enough pseudo-academics that fit into that category. The other flipside of the coin, someone does well in studies because they remember through understanding, not rope learning.
That is just old eugenics propaganda, theories on the same line as Scientology in terms of validity. Man, if your argument shall hold any value at all I want to know what you define as intelligence? I have seen a genious playing the piano virtuosly and capable of having deep reflected conversations, thou in the social arena he is totally withdrawn (probably because of the lack of attention he got as a child) and widely regarded by the crowd as a failure and "feeble minded".
It's a factor, certainly. But quality of education CAN make a difference. Stupid people are rarer than you think. Inspire a dull mind and it gets sharper. I've seen the process up close many times.
raulitech, do you mean to say that if einstein were locked in a cell for most of his childhood (without any mental stimulation) he would still be a genius?
I never said any such thing. We are what our lives have made us, Einstein had a decent childhood and his obsession with working out things was a driving factor in who he became. Still Einstein was extraordinary there are lots of people with good childhoods but are average minded.
Of course they are rare! Did I say otherwise? The fact is it happens every now and then and the study of a human mind starved of stimulation, and thoughts without a language, are revealing. I believe there is even a structural, physical difference as shown in PET scans of such childrens' brains.
Unfortunately, the stupid are the backbone to supply the intellegint environment. Construction workers, janitors, the majority of human drones that support the aristocracy that is intelligence. It's a horrible thing to say, but it's true, and until robots or something else can support the seemingly "low intelligence" jobs, we need stupid people. I'm not defending this its just a random thought, please prove me otherwise to ease my mind.
It IS a shame though that the current welfare system encourages the ill educated and unemployable to have more children, whilst those in employment are limited by their finite income. There was a time when only the best hunters/gatherers/farmers had offspring and the species grew strong as a result. Eugenics is already here, sadly it's working in reverse!
Thats actually a very interesting way to look it. Assuming we are still evolving (or currently evolving), it makes sense that we aren't evolving to be 'stupid' just because their are so many stupid people.
thanks you, but I'm quite aware of how evolution works. Humans nor cows are evolving to be 'stupid'. That would require a selective pressure that favors stupidity or a the genes that effect intelligence to be connected with some trait ranchers select for. I believe our genes for intelligence are not changing, just some people are raised poorly and end up being stupid, most don't have the 'stupid' gene.
I doubt manageability is connected with intelligence, thats like saying people who do better in the military or stupider (not implying you or I think that). I bet cows would do as well as any other domesticated animal in the wild away from humans, including dogs, and dogs are pretty smart. Their lack of an education from an adult who knows how to survive is the probably the biggest problem (similarly to stupid humans) but comparing humans to domesticated animals is tough and hardly worth it.
Oh I watch Star Trek, how could you think I didn't? :( You're right that Eugenics does not take nurture into account. Feral children are a very interesting subject, especially important to notions of "critical periods" of development.
Phill u can encourage things like adoption or a small family rather than taking people to be sterilised and pay some people to have more children.
ceejaywt 10 months ago
There is one ethical way to do eugenics with little ethical conflicts that I can think of. Pay childless, fertile women a sum of money, say 1000 dollars a month, which they lose if they get pregnant. Poor women could then choose not to have children, and you would have less poor people. With less poor people you'd have better resources to educate the remainder, and the less motivated people would be weeded out from the gene pool.
n3rdm4n 10 months ago
What these pro eugenics fucks remind me of are the combine from half life 2
fcpictures 1 year ago
@fcpictures Can't argue with that kind of "logic"
GodlessInfinity 1 year ago
I don't think that eugenics is necessarily a bad idea, I think the methods used and the motives behind them (what you objected to) were the mistake. There are equitable ways to go about eugenics, and there are various traits that can be selected for and against.
You seem imagine the worst possible form of eugenics.
GodlessInfinity 1 year ago
Why do you keep saying that eugenics imply sterilization of unfit individuals ?
What about encouraging reproduction by persons with inheritable desirable traits? You can have a eugenics program with volunteers, what is so hard about that ? the rest of the world can mind it's own business, nobody has to sterilize anyone ... damn, where we would be if Hitler had never existed
You can have eugenic while respecting people's freedom, and i dont understand why you didnt approach the subject this way
wedingo 1 year ago
@wedingo Exactly, the idea of Eugenics is not necessarily a bad one. But as we all know a good idea can be taken to a horrible extreme, dangerous and terrible things can be done with good ideas. There's no reason that Eugenics would have to be coercive or brutal. We don't rule out nuclear power just because the same idea can be used to make a bomb.
GodlessInfinity 1 year ago
turning one thing you said around: what's the point in being human if you can't get to the stars by being such?
CavalloDiSpade 1 year ago
I think the world is being treated actively with dysgenics. I am against both dysgenics and eugenics, and would rather people just play "fair". But I think saying this is probably like being against guns because swordfighting was "fair". I guess the real answer is that the world is inherently unfair, and evolution works when unfair tactics are not 100% effective, which is a good thing.
LyriMetacurl 1 year ago
I find it interesting that people think evolution has stopped for humans. In fact we are changing more rapidly than ever before. Birth control is a major factor. It is not random who uses birth control. Please watch the movie Idiocracy. They show how the intelligent/educated people have fewer children and in the future everyone is an idiot (very funny movie).
WarmWeatherGuy 2 years ago
Poorly educated and mentaly unrefined is what elitist find to be very useful. Let's be intellectually honest. Please address this.
Note: Smart enough to do a repetitive job and ignorant enough not to question anything else. We're kidding ourselves.
blaziermissy 2 years ago
Great vid, but football has as much functional utility as pissing in the wind. Traditionalized insanity. We should all question eugenics, b/c we're living in a world where we pay people millions to play football: bashing against each other in a ridiculus display of ignorance to the repercussions of long term injury, all the while we know that money is kept from innocent people who are starving to death all over the world.
Pituitary retards.
blaziermissy 2 years ago
As a child I was relatively intelligent I guess, I then entered a less popular social group. More intelligent geeks but that made me smarter then came the internet and an explosion of increased intellect because the information was there to spark my curiosity. I think Einstein was dyslexic. Give the mind the right stimulation and watch the light shine. Anyone who says otherwise is lacking themselves and externalising that insecurity on others
LiberateBDesh 2 years ago
is he smoking weed?
radon1234567 3 years ago
haha .. i dont think so .. its called a truck drivers roll up .. he has got some great vids though.
siliconchipped 2 years ago
no.. no he is not
08u235086349h08gh3 2 years ago
Excellent response Phil. I agree with the adopted newborn theory. Most ghetto kids in NYC don't get adopted by Connecticut doctors. So the question stands: as much as it is taboo to ask, should parenthood come with a license? And why seeing a problem and not correcting it is seen as morally acceptable, and intervening as morally reprehensible? As you said, education may be the answer. So I propose licensing parenthood. Want kids? Go learn how to be a decent parent. It is only fair.
dbanici 3 years ago
we don't need to become sterilized. It can be done in an completely objective, fair, honest and kind manner. for the benefit of all
simplybornhuman 3 years ago
UK wealthier? You bunch of dip-poops! Do you really think Eugenics increases GDP and wealth? You need to study and realize the roots of Eugenics and economics! Read Charlotte Izerbyt's book, "The Dumbing down of America." It's done by design you stupid asses! Fluoride, mercury, aspartame, hours of TV, GMO foods! RESEARCH AND LEARN THE TRUTH! STUPIDZ!
brorange33 3 years ago
Eugenics is not a movement, it is a philosophy which simply states that those who are weak should have less than 2 children, while those who are strong should have more than 2 children
simplybornhuman 3 years ago
We always forget about the dominant minority of movers and shakers and this planet, the so-called financial elite. Plans to better our society must take into consideration the gatekeepers who have consistently done everything they could to hold us back.
If there is a discussion of "offing" certain undesirable types, be sure to include the royal families of Europe, the banking dynasties and all the heads of organized religion world wide.
alexhallgren 3 years ago 2
euthanize all with IQ under 120. it won't happen for a while, but it WILL happen, if the human race wants to survive.
khattamshud 3 years ago
What an ignorant, indoctrinated comment you've just made. I'd consider erasing it if I were you.
blaziermissy 2 years ago
Eugenics is not about creating a super race,but about creating a superstupid,easy to control,ever consuming race.
is it bad? i think so!
is it working? yep...
THEOUTSIDE 3 years ago
how the hell you can think that we can overtake problems just killing 'em? that's not racism, that's idiocy. PROBLEMS, along with human imperfection and sicknesses have leaded the man to study for passing and ovverrun 'em. If we had applied eugenics since the ancient times, now we would have been in the stone age!! cancer research, multiple sclerosis research and the successes of nowdays medicine are just a result of human imperfection and of the willing to solve 'em.
fenotipobombay 3 years ago
Whats your Opinion on the Facial Recognition System,and Genetic Tailoring .
PHUCKCCDP 3 years ago
Ok. So we can agree that intelligence is determined both by environmental and genetic factors. However, this does not provide argument against Eugenics. Apathetic parents who do not mentally stimulate their children will usually raise children who are also mentally incompetent and apt to raise their children the exact same way. In this way, stupidity is a hereditary, learned behavior.
Since the most influential behavioral learning comes from parents,why wouldn't sterilization be a good solution?
nvmthebollocks17 3 years ago
Eugenics is not a bad thing at all. Infact, I favour it strongly. The UK could become a lot wealthier and more productive if all the chavs who breed like rabbits and claim millions benefits (that we pay for) were thoroughly sterilised.
marklavar 3 years ago
So you don't believe intelligence is inherited, ie is genetic? I have to disagree there. Also, the idea that our new environment of money favors the intelligent is incorrect (in the main). Yes, there is a new environment created by humanity, but it turns nature on its head. BUT... I don't condone eugenics! I just have to say that perhaps the future is somewhat bleak.
DiscipleZ3R0 4 years ago
Eugenics used to be done all the time, only not knowingly. Each culture sets a set of characteristics (genotype) which the masses are to consider desireble in a spouse, think of Confucianism or the Old Testament, both works contain Eugenics programs and the cultures which adhered to them prospered, whereas the hedonic cultures are slums.
Thus it ultimately comes down to attitude and tact on the part of men and women everywhere.
SyndiCossack 4 years ago
i have always thought that if the Romans were still going today maybe they would have put a eugenics system in place a thousand years ago. just think about where we would be right now if they had and where science would be now. my family would not be here, nor would David Beckham's and look what that would have done to the face of US football.... oh yeah...
Yagharekthedead 4 years ago
Maybe the Roman empire was far-sighted and willingly sacrificed itself so that you could have David Beckham sitting on a bench in Los Angeles.
It's a thought. :)
philhellenes 4 years ago
you were raised by dogs? England has devolved it was conquered by outsiders and liberals its just was not good enough should have been conquered w2
louis12346 4 years ago
Thousands of years? How long did it take to get a bull mastiff?
BoozyBeggar 4 years ago
What is the fkn matter with all Englishman. Your country is turning into Haiti within 25 yrs and you sit and rationalize.
ronoman88 4 years ago
Here's an idea: mandatory reversible sterilization.
Basically, people have to earn the right to have kids.
ebiljebus 4 years ago
I like this idea, but I'd not make it mandatory for all individuals. Administration of an IQ test would come first, then if the score was too low for the standards in place the individual would have a reversible procedure conducted on them.
PeterForDictator 3 years ago
Mankind is doomed due to the welfare state which promotes the genes that cannot survive on there own at the expense of those who can.
The weak that hold back the strong should be allowed to perish.
Even the spartans used to throw weak children off of cliffs to keep there state strong.
fatuesque 4 years ago
you're an idiot. Killing people because of weak genes isnt the answer. sterilization? kinda extreme. Suggesting aiding in the death of those that some percieve as genetically inferior? fuckin stupid
khbgkh 4 years ago
the spartans live thousands of years ago, and the last person who followed that philosophy you just mentioned was Hitler, he actively killed many thousands of handicapped people.
wakeangel2001 4 years ago
I agree with you.
DecimusAquila 3 years ago
I'm bored; I'm going to go picket a hospital for preventing the genetic bottle necking of the weak.
trueuniverse2100 4 years ago
Eugenics and social planning cannot be entirely avoided.
trueuniverse2100 4 years ago
Only to the degree that everyone should try to find the best WILLING mate to have their children. And that is natural selection which is what evolution is all about trying every possible approach and seeing not works.
specialkalpha 4 years ago
Yes humans have created their own environment detatched from the natural one. However it is not an environment conducive to creating better people (creative, intelligent, healthy, non-resentful towards reality) but instead favours ruthless, bureaucratic, passive-aggressive people ill-equipped to deal with the wider reality which will always and inevitably encompass human life.
compostmodernity 4 years ago 5
I agree completely with every single word you say.
philhellenes 4 years ago
What we get rated for is what we publicly display of ourselves, not the whole picture. How dare some of you people rate your fellow humans as lesser (and in the eyes of eugenics, unwanted) based on their public display? Don't you see, this is putting yourself in the role of the king sentecing the least able performer in his court to be eaten by the lions, simple because it "wasn't up to his standard". Hypocrites!
christian752 4 years ago
sorry-but i support the 'hellenic ideal':healthy mind in a healthy body! the guy on the video looks like a typical egghead for me.maybe intelligent-but somehow degenerated!
offense27 4 years ago
Yes every person is entitled to a quality education. But someone completing a degree and even doing well in it does not mean they are intelligent. If you have a good memory you can do well in studies...and i've seen enough pseudo-academics that fit into that category. The other flipside of the coin, someone does well in studies because they remember through understanding, not rope learning.
raulitech 4 years ago
That is just old eugenics propaganda, theories on the same line as Scientology in terms of validity. Man, if your argument shall hold any value at all I want to know what you define as intelligence? I have seen a genious playing the piano virtuosly and capable of having deep reflected conversations, thou in the social arena he is totally withdrawn (probably because of the lack of attention he got as a child) and widely regarded by the crowd as a failure and "feeble minded".
christian752 4 years ago 2
You mean, any child could be made into an intelligent person or a genius? You got to be joking. Intelligence is restricted by genetics.
raulitech 4 years ago
It's a factor, certainly. But quality of education CAN make a difference. Stupid people are rarer than you think. Inspire a dull mind and it gets sharper. I've seen the process up close many times.
philhellenes 4 years ago
raulitech, do you mean to say that if einstein were locked in a cell for most of his childhood (without any mental stimulation) he would still be a genius?
EternalFuu 4 years ago
I never said any such thing. We are what our lives have made us, Einstein had a decent childhood and his obsession with working out things was a driving factor in who he became. Still Einstein was extraordinary there are lots of people with good childhoods but are average minded.
raulitech 4 years ago
Feral Children...extremely rare.
raulitech 4 years ago
Of course they are rare! Did I say otherwise? The fact is it happens every now and then and the study of a human mind starved of stimulation, and thoughts without a language, are revealing. I believe there is even a structural, physical difference as shown in PET scans of such childrens' brains.
philhellenes 4 years ago
Unfortunately, the stupid are the backbone to supply the intellegint environment. Construction workers, janitors, the majority of human drones that support the aristocracy that is intelligence. It's a horrible thing to say, but it's true, and until robots or something else can support the seemingly "low intelligence" jobs, we need stupid people. I'm not defending this its just a random thought, please prove me otherwise to ease my mind.
objectivereality 4 years ago 2
intellegint*intelligent
objectivereality 4 years ago
Prosper and Long Life
kalin666 5 years ago
It IS a shame though that the current welfare system encourages the ill educated and unemployable to have more children, whilst those in employment are limited by their finite income. There was a time when only the best hunters/gatherers/farmers had offspring and the species grew strong as a result. Eugenics is already here, sadly it's working in reverse!
Janus1962 5 years ago
Thats actually a very interesting way to look it. Assuming we are still evolving (or currently evolving), it makes sense that we aren't evolving to be 'stupid' just because their are so many stupid people.
crypticseth 5 years ago
Evolution has no goal in mind, it just favors what works best at the moment. All of our domesticated animals "evolved" to be stupider.
kalin666 5 years ago
thanks you, but I'm quite aware of how evolution works. Humans nor cows are evolving to be 'stupid'. That would require a selective pressure that favors stupidity or a the genes that effect intelligence to be connected with some trait ranchers select for. I believe our genes for intelligence are not changing, just some people are raised poorly and end up being stupid, most don't have the 'stupid' gene.
crypticseth 5 years ago
Sure, there was selective pressure by the ranchers for more managable livestock. The smart ones are the hardest to control.
kalin666 5 years ago
I doubt manageability is connected with intelligence, thats like saying people who do better in the military or stupider (not implying you or I think that). I bet cows would do as well as any other domesticated animal in the wild away from humans, including dogs, and dogs are pretty smart. Their lack of an education from an adult who knows how to survive is the probably the biggest problem (similarly to stupid humans) but comparing humans to domesticated animals is tough and hardly worth it.
crypticseth 5 years ago
Oh I watch Star Trek, how could you think I didn't? :( You're right that Eugenics does not take nurture into account. Feral children are a very interesting subject, especially important to notions of "critical periods" of development.
kalin666 5 years ago