Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a troll by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldnt be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill, is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

I believe in disgenics and believe eugenics is the answer

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Re: I believe in disgenics and believe eugenics is the answer

    Originally posted by OldmanDan View Post
    I don't actually believe either of your two simple and indisputable facts.

    I have known brilliant people born of some real dolts and I have known some real dolts born of two brilliant people.
    I don't dispute that some of the smartest persons can come from dolts or vice-versa. This is statistics. Anything is possible but what matters are the averages.

    When I say "the Chinese are 10cm smaller than the Dutch" I don't mean that every single Chinese person is smaller than every Dutch person. That's not how it works. In fact the highest Chinese person is larger than the highest Dutch person.


    Originally posted by WIKIPEDIA
    Heritability of IQ - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Estimates in the academic research of the heritability of IQ have varied from below 0.5[2] to a high of 0.9 (of a maximum of 1.0).[5] IQ heritability increases during early childhood, but it is unclear whether it stabilizes thereafter.[6] A 1996 statement by the American Psychological Association gave about .45 for children and about .75 during and after adolescence.[7] A 2004 meta-analysis of reports in Current Directions in Psychological Science gave an overall estimate of around .85 for 18-year-olds and older.[8] The New York Times Magazine has listed about three quarters as a figure held by the majority of studies.[9]
    0 heritability means IQ of the children is entirely determined by enviromental factors. 1 means genes are the only factor in determining IQ. Even the lowest figures of 0.5 describe a pretty strong relationship (though my research has convinced me it's more like 0.8).


    Originally posted by OldmanDan
    I also see no correlation between birth rates and intelligence. I think that before you go about deciding what to do about something, you should further research whether you initial premise is valid.
    A graph of disgenics stats in the EU-27 is uploaded with this post. It measures education vs fertilty. Source is eurostat. I expect this picture to be even worse for a more unequal society like the U.S.

    Other people have also compiled some data on "global disgenics": http://www.iapsych.com/iqmr/fe/Linke...s/lynn2008.pdf (I suggest you check it out, its a short read)

    Country Fertility IQ
    Hong Kong 0.95 108
    Singapore 1.06 108
    South Korea 1.27 106
    North Korea 2.10 106
    Japan 1.40 105
    Taiwan 1.57 105
    China 1.73 105
    Italy 1.28 102
    Switzerland 1.43 101
    Iceland 1.92 101
    Mongolia 2.25 101
    Austria 1.36 100
    United Kingdom 1.66 100
    Netherlands 1.66 100
    Norway 1.78 100
    Luxembourg 1.78 100
    Poland 1.25 99
    Germany 1.39 99
    Estonia 1.40 99
    Canada 1.61 99
    Belgium 1.64 99
    Sweden 1.66 99
    Finland 1.73 99
    New Zealand 1.79 99
    Czech Republic 1.21 98
    Latvia 1.27 98
    Spain 1.28 98
    Andorra 1.30 98
    Hungary 1.32 98
    Denmark 1.74 98
    Australia 1.76 98
    France 1.84 98
    United States 2.09 98
    Ukraine 1.17 97
    Russia 1.28 97
    Belarus 1.43 97
    Malta 1.50 97
    Slovenia 1.25 96
    Slovakia 1.33 96
    Moldova 1.85 96
    Uruguay 1.89 96
    Portugal 1.47 95
    Israel 2.41 95
    Armenia 1.33 94
    Romania 1.37 94
    Georgia 1.42 94
    Kazakhstan 1.89 94
    Vietnam 1.91 94
    Bulgaria 1.38 93
    Argentina 2.16 93
    Greece 1.34 92
    Ireland 1.86 92
    Malaysia 3.04 92
    Lithuania 1.20 91
    Macedonia 1.57 91
    Thailand 1.64 91
    Cyprus 1.82 91
    Brunei 2.28 91
    Cambodia 3.37 91
    Bosnia &amp; Herzegovina 1.22 90
    Croatia 1.40 90
    Bermuda 1.89 90
    Turkey 1.92 90
    Chile 2.00 90
    Albania 2.03 90
    Kyrgyzstan 2.69 90
    Serbia 1.78 89
    Mauritius 1.95 89
    Costa Rica 2.24 89
    Suriname 2.32 89
    Cook Islands 3.10 89
    Laos 4.68 89
    Mexico 2.42 88
    Ecuador 2.68 88
    Samoa 2.94 88
    Brazil 1.91 87
    Myanmar (Burma) 1.98 87
    Guyana 2.04 87
    Indonesia 2.40 87
    Azerbaijan 2.46 87
    Bolivia 2.85 87
    Uzbekistan 2.91 87
    Turkmenistan 3.37 87
    Timor-Leste 3.53 87
    Tajikistan 4.00 87
    Iraq 4.18 87
    Seychelles 1.74 86
    Kuwait 2.91 86
    Tonga 3.00 86
    Philippines 3.11 86
    Cuba 1.66 85
    Trinidad &amp; Tobago 1.74 85
    New Caledonia 2.28 85
    Peru 2.51 85
    Fiji 2.73 85
    Kiribati 4.16 85
    Yemen 6.58 85
    Puerto Rico 1.75 84
    Iran 1.80 84
    Bahamas 2.18 84
    Venezuela 2.23 84
    Colombia 2.54 84
    Jordan 2.63 84
    Morocco 2.68 84
    Panama 2.68 84
    Vanuatu 2.70 84
    United Arab Emirates 2.88 84
    Micronesia 3.16 84
    Belize 3.60 84
    Marshall Islands 3.85 84
    Paraguay 3.89 84
    Solomon Islands 3.91 84
    Pakistan 4.00 84
    Saudi Arabia 4.00 84
    Afghanistan 6.69 84
    Tunisia 1.74 83
    Algeria 1.89 83
    Bahrain 2.60 83
    Libya 3.28 83
    Syria 3.40 83
    Papua New Guinea 3.88 83
    Oman 5.77 83
    Lebanon 1.90 82
    India 2.73 82
    Dominican Replublic 2.83 82
    Bangladesh 3.11 82
    Madagascar 5.62 82
    Northern Mariana Isles 1.24 81
    Nicaragua 2.75 81
    Egypt 2.83 81
    Honduras 3.59 81
    Maldives 4.90 81
    Barbados 1.65 80
    El Salvador 3.12 80
    Bhutan 4.74 80
    Sri Lanka 1.84 79
    Guatemala 3.82 79
    Qatar 2.81 78
    Nepal 4.10 78
    Comoros 5.03 77
    Cape Verde 3.38 76
    Mauritania 5.86 76
    Uganda 6.71 73
    South Africa 2.20 72
    Kenya 4.91 72
    Tanzania 4.97 72
    St Vincent 1.83 71
    Grenada 2.34 71
    Jamaica 2.41 71
    Ghana 3.99 71
    Sudan 4.72 71
    Zambia 5.39 71
    Antigua &amp; Barbuda 2.24 70
    Botswana 2.79 70
    Namibia 3.06 70
    Togo 4.96 70
    Benin 5.20 70
    Rwanda 5.43 70
    Cote d'Ivoire 4.50 69
    Nigeria 5.49 69
    Malawi 5.92 69
    Burundi 6.55 69
    Mali 7.42 69
    Niger 7.46 69
    Swaziland 3.53 68
    Eritrea 5.08 68
    Djibouti 5.31 68
    Chad 6.25 68
    Angola 6.35 68
    Burkina 6.47 68
    Somalia 6.76 68
    Dominica 1.94 67
    St Kitts &amp; Nevis 2.31 67
    Lesotho 3.28 67
    Guinea-Bissau 4.86 67
    Haiti 4.94 67
    Sao Tome &amp; Principe 5.62 67
    Guinea 5.79 67
    Liberia 6.02 67
    Zimbabwe 3.13 66
    Senegal 4.38 66
    Gambia 5.30 66
    Congo: Dem Rep of (Zaire) 6.45 65
    Cameroon 4.39 64
    Central African Rep. 4.41 64
    Equatorial Guinea 4.55 64
    Mozambique 4.62 64
    Gabon 4.74 64
    Ethiopia 5.22 64
    Congo: Rep of (Brazz) 6.07 64
    Sierra Leone 6.08 64
    St Lucia 2.18 62
    Attached Files
    Last edited by erikvv; 01-13-2013, 03:52 PM.

    ?


    • #17
      Re: I believe in disgenics and believe eugenics is the answer

      Found this piece of info by the CDC:

      Women with college degrees can be expected to complete their childbearing with 1.6-2.0 children each; 1.7 for non-Hispanic white, 1.6 for non-Hispanic black, and 2.0 for Hispanic women. For women with less education the total expected number of children are: 3.2 children for those with 0-8 years of education; 2.3 children for those with 9-11 years of education and 2.7 for high school graduates.

      NCHS Pressroom - 1997 Fact Sheet - Mothers Education and Birth Rate

      ?


      • #18
        Re: I believe in disgenics and believe eugenics is the answer

        Originally posted by erikvv View Post
        Your last sentence interesting and I think about it a lot. How exactly is it ethically perverse? Is order more perverse than randomness? Is chaos preferable to organization? I guess in some ways it is.
        Its perverse because it reduces human beings to animals where some individuals are more valuable [to society] than others based on their heritable traits.
        Originally posted by erikvv View Post
        I am a humanist and don't necessary see a different conflict in this matter than in many others. Society is a contract. We ourselves decide how to organize ourselves decide how to organize it. We as people get our freedoms from it, but in return there is something like having shared responsibility. Part of that responsibility is leaving the world in a better state than when we entered it.
        Which is all well and good on its face. Or if you are talking enabling democratic principles to spread across the world or what have you. But you have left that behind and wondered off the reservation by advocating eugenics.
        Originally posted by erikvv
        I believe that part of my uneasyness with comes from this. I would like to believe, and many political ideologies presume, that all individuals have equal potential. We value meritocracy and the the uplifting of everyone: everybody gets a chance and everyone gets what they deserve. The sad truth is that with all the uplifting we will attempt, not everyone will get a fair shot. People aren't born equal. That doesn't mean we shouldn't try, but we should also realise that we will never solve it, we can only attempt to make people's lives better now and in the future.
        People are absolutely not born equal: but they are created equal in the eyes of God. That precise principle is enshrined on our founding documents and it lends to man a degree of moral worth that atheism, humanism etc, simply cannot afford.

        Humanists, atheists and unbelievers of various stripes can comprehend that principle but their ideology prevents them from accepting it and if they condone it, they betray their ideology, in so doing.

        Which takes us back to my prior point about your intellectual honesty. I may disagree with you, but I give you credit for following the logic to its conclusion: if there is no God to answer to, what is wrong with eugenics? Why not apply artificial selection to humans?

        Why not? [that question is directed to any and all readers]

        Originally posted by erikvv View Post
        Another part of my uneasiness of course comes from the taboo and the association with some nasty policies and ideologies. I have delved into some work by current white nationalists and disagree enough that I do not identify with them. I disagree with their general views on white superiority, jews, the media and the left. There are other parts I do agree with but I can say that about most ideologies.

        (I'll get around to replying to everyone who is on topic).
        You would do well to heed your uneasiness, imo. Your little wagon is pointed down a very dark and forbidding road that has been trod by the likes of Hitler.

        ?


        • #19
          Re: I believe in disgenics and believe eugenics is the answer

          Originally posted by Darth Hussein Omar View Post
          Its perverse because it reduces human beings to animals where some individuals are more valuable [to society] than others based on their heritable traits.

          Which is all well and good on its face. Or if you are talking enabling democratic principles to spread across the world or what have you. But you have left that behind and wondered off the reservation by advocating eugenics.

          People are absolutely not born equal: but they are created equal in the eyes of God. That precise principle is enshrined on our founding documents and it lends to man a degree of moral worth that atheism, humanism etc, simply cannot afford.

          Humanists, atheists and unbelievers of various stripes can comprehend that principle but their ideology prevents them from accepting it and if they condone it, they betray their ideology, in so doing.

          Which takes us back to my prior point about your intellectual honesty. I may disagree with you, but I give you credit for following the logic to its conclusion: if there is no God to answer to, what is wrong with eugenics? Why not apply artificial selection to humans?
          Why not? [that question is directed to any and all readers]

          You would do well to heed your uneasiness, imo. Your little wagon is pointed down a very dark and forbidding road that has been trod by the likes of Hitler.
          We disagree on your moral conclusions about the value of human life - from the theistic & atheistic POV. The non-theist may or may not value human life, but that value will clearly not be premised on a reflection of a deity. That's a different discussion, though.

          We don't know enough about the constellation of traits that we might find desirable - how to invoke them, how to avoid side-effects, long-term implications, & so on. It may be possible @ some point much further down the timeline to determine all these things with precision. Then we could start to think about making incremental small steps towards optimum traits, whatever those may turn out to be.

          Putting intelligence into the feedback loop is probably a good thing - but I still would counsel caution & gradual incremental change, rather than trying to breed/gene-engineer a Superman all in one pass. The sun won't be going out for a few billion years, as far as we can tell from the current state of the art. There's plenty of time yet, & no pressing reason to hurry.

          ?


          • #20
            Re: I believe in disgenics and believe eugenics is the answer

            Originally posted by OldmanDan View Post
            Right now the intelligentand hard working are forced to work to support the rest. The rest have the time to sit at home and procreate. Great system.
            Somebodies busting their ass, and somebodies at home gettin' some, and you think it's the guy busting his ass that's the smart one?

            (̅_̅_̅(̅(̅_̅_̅_̅_̅_̅̅()ڪ

            Originally posted by OldmanDan View Post
            Right now the intelligentand hard working are forced to work to support the rest. The rest have the time to sit at home and procreate. Great system.
            Somebodies busting their ass, and somebodies at home gettin' some, and you think it's the guy busting his ass that's the smart one?

            ?


            • #21
              Re: I believe in disgenics and believe eugenics is the answer

              Originally posted by Blue Doggy View Post
              Intelligence is defined by each culture, isn't it? For instance, drop a harvard grad off in the rainforests of south america and he has a much less chance of survival than the native people there who live in those forests. Yet he is seen as more intelligent than the native indians. But in reality he is less intelligent if intelligence is a means to survival.

              Would the world be better off if a few us us were not intelligent enough to discover how to split the atom and hence create the worst weapon man has ever created?

              For modern society intelligence is judged by how well one brain can learn the things needed to prosper in a modern technological society. For the rain forest people it is the intelligence needed to survive in their primitive society.
              For both it is about adapting when aquiring new information. Through reasoning, pattern matching etc.


              Intelligence has been over rated. We have used it to begin killing others with stones, then stone tipped arrows, moving upwards to biological warfare and the nuclear bomb. Intelligence has turned out to bring us as many curses and positive things.
              For almost every technology you can think of a beneficial use and a non-beneficial one. I'd argue that so far the beneficial effects far outweight the negative effects.


              Degrees of intelligence play a role in the social heiarchy in society. If all humans were in the upper reaches of intelligence who would do the work? Perhaps they would kill one another off as all wanted to be top dogs and would refuse to not benefit from their higher intelligence.

              Perhaps it is the case of some humans being too intelligent instead of some humans not being as intelligent as others.

              Yet no matter how intelligent humans become we have never been able to solve the problems that face mankind, we seem incapable of fixing what is possible of being fixed. Perhaps the most powerful force in the lives of man is not intelligence but a deep self centered nature that trumps intelligence. Perhaps real intelligence is the ability to see what human nature has done and addresses it. If that is so, then even the most intelligent is not intelligent at all.
              You seem to have a very dim view of humans. Like with Oldmandan, there is hardly an argument possible with such folk.

              Most discussions on this forum are not self-centered at all.


              Originally posted by hoosier88 View Post
              We disagree on your moral conclusions about the value of human life - from the theistic & atheistic POV. The non-theist may or may not value human life, but that value will clearly not be premised on a reflection of a deity. That's a different discussion, though.

              We don't know enough about the constellation of traits that we might find desirable - how to invoke them, how to avoid side-effects, long-term implications, & so on. It may be possible @ some point much further down the timeline to determine all these things with precision. Then we could start to think about making incremental small steps towards optimum traits, whatever those may turn out to be.

              Putting intelligence into the feedback loop is probably a good thing - but I still would counsel caution & gradual incremental change, rather than trying to breed/gene-engineer a Superman all in one pass. The sun won't be going out for a few billion years, as far as we can tell from the current state of the art. There's plenty of time yet, & no pressing reason to hurry.
              Maybe you are right. But this is unprecendented territory we are in. I would rather not take my chances. If we take the (wrong) assumption that intelligence is passed on 1:1 from parents to children, at current fertility rates (1.0) the number of high IQ individuals halves every generation (30 years). If you have 100.000 individuals now in a little over 5 centuries they will all have died out.

              Ofcourse the rest of us then have a few billion years to watch the stars and will be left wondering if we could have went there.

              ?

              Working...
              X