Humane and Compassionate Eugenics - Page 2 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Pollution, global warming, urbanisation etc.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
By lepus
#1062151
Since the average IQ is in decline as a result of dysgenic fertility, what if there is a trade-off between decreased IQ and disease resistance? In terms of unforeseen genetic trade-offs, is it any better if our average IQ is artificially decreasing (dysgenics) or artificially increasing (eugenics)? (And for evidence that it is decreasing, see Dysgenics by R. Lynn).

Also, there is plenty of indirect evidence that the number of genes which govern intelligence is relatively small. Selecting for IQ would have no real effect on genetic variation, and any pleitropic side-effects would be minimal; for instance,

The results of these studies also imply that the genetic variation in intelligence depends on a relatively small number of genes because the possible variability between even closely related individuals seems to be enormous



I see that you are avoiding answering my question whether you actaully have any experience from breeding for traits...
User avatar
By MB.
#1062472
A disproportionately high number of Indians and Blacks were sterilised, not because of their racial ancestry, but because they had low intelligence.


Are you even listening to yourself?

Why was a "disproportionately high number of Indians and Blacks" sterlised? Becuase scientific evidence demonstrates that N***** and injuns are dumb?

Somehow, I doubt the impartiality of this case.

Bottom line, its rascism. I don't see how you can keep deflecting these cases as total impartial based on a benign desire to improve the genetics of the human race.

I can't believe you can't see the corelation between wealth and IQ scores as a social factor. I wonder why the poor uneducated due worse on IQ scores then the rich educated elite?

My point being, basicaly, that Ix's eugenics policiy (irregardless of being 'voluntary') is a "worship the rich, sterlise the poor" policy.

That, in and off itself, is fucking horrifying.
By Ixa
#1062490
Why was a "disproportionately high number of Indians and Blacks" sterlised? Becuase scientific evidence demonstrates that N***** and injuns are dumb?
Individuals were sterilised on a case-by-case basis. Only criminals and the feebleminded were sterilised. Millions of blacks and indians were not sterilised because they were neither criminals nor feebleminded.

I can't believe you can't see the corelation between wealth and IQ scores as a social factor. I wonder why the poor uneducated due worse on IQ scores then the rich educated elite?
There is indeed a relationship between income and IQ: IQ is a causal determinant of wealth. Unintelligent children often do poorly at school and thus fail to learn the skills necessary to get well-paying jobs. The relationship between IQ and wealth is not absolute, but moderate.

My point being, basicaly, that Ix's eugenics policiy (irregardless of being 'voluntary') is a "worship the rich, sterlise the poor" policy.
Except that the poor as poor were not sterilised ; criminals the feebleminded were sterilised.

Ok I mean my definitions are that far off from th[…]

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Tue[…]

''So what?'' I'm beginning to think that you hav[…]

Racism

So the genetics involved with long distance runni[…]