Eugenics

[Godslayer Jillian]

Let me clear this once more, hopefully this time it will stick:

A belief in social stratification is inherently a right-wing belief. Your claims stand on this: that the elite would use genetic engineering to perpetuate their own power over people to the point where the social cleavage cannot be destroyed.
You all have not even attempted to prove how a 'race' of beautiful intelligent and healthy 'supermen' would not dare challenge these suppositions.

I am an anarchist and you all know that (some find it laughable even though their own political views are inconsistent).
You all should know that I would be one of the first ones to decry another method of economic oppression and social control.
But your belief that it is eugenics that will cause this is entirely misplaced and more based in sci-fi than actual conflict theory.
I bring to mind the example of private education once more because it is a nice example of the fears you guys have about eugenics yet you don't see a problem with private education (or at least haven't voiced it)

Why make a technology the scapegoat of social evils instead of the underlying social status quo that takes advantage of it?
Your claims are no more valid than those of primitivists who believe oppression is caused by industrialism and not by the elite usurping industrialism for their own benefit.

[Apathy's_Child]

Originally Posted by Godslayer Jillian

Let me clear this once more, hopefully this time it will stick:

A belief in social stratification is inherently a right-wing belief. Your claims stand on this: that the elite would use genetic engineering to perpetuate their own power over people to the point where the social cleavage cannot be destroyed.
You all have not even attempted to prove how a 'race' of beautiful intelligent and healthy 'supermen' would not dare challenge these suppositions.

For the same reasons the naturally advantaged haven't risen above the rest to lead the fight for equality, in more siginificant numbers than those from different backgrounds. In substantial part, I'd imagine this is because the system within which they operate rewards them for playing the game - a well-loved child from an affluent family will nearly always fare better than a largely ignored child of dysfunctional parents who grew up in shit, and be far more easily able to access the rewards of working within the systems of society. A significant proportion of human beings are lazy, apathetic creatures who need a grievance that's theirs before they'll get off their asses.

As for your claim that this argument rests upon the claim that the elite will "use genetic engineering to perpetuate their own power over people" - no. It has nothing to do with the idea that somewhere, the talking heads of "the corporations" are sitting in a room laughing at us and egging each other on like Wormtongue. It's that the systems of this country, at the very least, are set up in such a way that this would significantly disadvantage the poor (supposing techniques for enhancing goods looks and intelligence were ever perfected), without bringing great benefits to society at large. (I'm assuming here that genetic engineering of intelligence would be unable to create science genii or similar, before anyone starts talking about cure for cancer or some shit, and can simply provide a child with a higher IQ than average.)

Originally Posted by Godslayer Jillian

I am an anarchist and you all know that (some find it laughable even though their own political views are inconsistent).
You all should know that I would be one of the first ones to decry another method of economic oppression and social control.
But your belief that it is eugenics that will cause this is entirely misplaced and more based in sci-fi than actual conflict theory.
I bring to mind the example of private education once more because it is a nice example of the fears you guys have about eugenics yet you don't see a problem with private education (or at least haven't voiced it)

Actually I have a huge problem with private education. However this thread is about something else, so the fact that nobody has brought it up means jack shit.

To bounce that back at you, how can YOU be anti-private education, and pro-something which doesn't at least involve some application on the part of a child?

As for the sci-fi comment - I don't get why you're so intent on labelling opposing theories to your own as geekboy conspiracy theories when it can be clearly demonstrated that in the society in which we live, genetic engineering of the kind we're talking about would deepen pre-existing inequalities.

Originally Posted by Godslayer Jillian

Why make a technology the scapegoat of social evils instead of the underlying social status quo that takes advantage of it?
Your claims are no more valid than those of primitivists who believe oppression is caused by industrialism and not by the elite usurping industrialism for their own benefit.

In pure principle I can almost agree with this, except that you're ignoring the glaringly obvious fact that despite not being "bad" in itself, technology does not exist in a vaccuum. With any new technology, there are far broader considerations than "wow, we can do that without killing or maiming anyone? AWESOME!!"

[Godslayer Jillian]

All that I can sum up with an emphasis on the last section of my previous post.
Why are you blaming a technology instead of the system?
I am not against a people having control over the education their children will receive, i.e. private education.
I am not against a society trying to passively promote a healthy gene pool, i.e. mild eugenics
I am not against a civilization trying to cure, prevent, and even obsolete malignant mutations, and even consciously moving around genetic composition, i.e. genetic engineering

What I am against is the social injustices that are already in place which will benefit the elite.
The difference with me is I'm not about to blame a technology for the actions of people.

[Apathy's_Child]

NOBODY IS. I don't think a single person in this thread has said anything to suggest they're thinking, "yeah, we have it right so far - but eugenics could really fuck up our perfect, equal society".

The opening post was on what people think of the idea of eugenics. People say, "not good - it worsen problems of inequality." Jillian shout, "what wrong with being super?" People say, "only some will be super. It worsen inequality." Jillian shout, "that's the fault of society, TECHNOPHOBE!!"

I'm not blaming technology for the failings of society. I'm saying that given the systems within which this particular technology would have to operate if it were allowed, the negative social impact would outweigh the benefits, loading the dice even more heavily in favor of the wealthy. This is not, as you seem to believe, a victimless crime.

After the revolution, maybe. Now - no.

Now ignore any valid points I made and tell I'm ignorant for not addressing a question nobody posed.

[Godslayer Jillian]

I never called you ignorant. But it is entirely wrong to complain about one out of hundreds of other methods of social oppression while ridiculing others.
Now I'm not saying my whole point is that it's hypocritical for those who bitch about Marxism now talk like wannabe marxists, but I'm actually going to challenge you to reread this thread and tell me you don't see how everyone is sayin EUGENICS is evil and not the elite.

[Apathy's_Child]

Originally Posted by Godslayer Jillian

I never called you ignorant. But it is entirely wrong to complain about one out of hundreds of other methods of social oppression while ridiculing others.
Now I'm not saying my whole point is that it's hypocritical for those who bitch about Marxism now talk like wannabe marxists, but I'm actually going to challenge you to reread this thread and tell me you don't see how everyone is sayin EUGENICS is evil and not the elite.

1. The reasons people have given for eugenics being a bad idea make this so obvious a sentiment that I don't get why you need them to spell it out.
2. The reason people have talked about euguenics and not other forms of social oppression is because THIS THREAD IS ABOUT EUGENICS SPECIFICALLY, AND NOT SOCIAL OPPRESSION IN GENERAL.

[Godslayer Jillian]

They have eugenics as a special fear in and of itself. You can't see that and yet try to condescend me by saying I need the topic to be spelled out for me?
Don't embarrass yourself.

[Apathy's_Child]

Originally Posted by Godslayer Jillian

They have eugenics as a special fear in and of itself. You can't see that and yet try to condescend me by saying I need the topic to be spelled out for me?
Don't embarrass yourself.

If you can't see WHY they have a fear of eugenics (i.e. because of the social factors which would accompany it), I'm not embarrassed to laugh at your flip-flopping defense of it which changes direction every time you post while avoiding every valid point made against it.

They do not have a fear of eugenics "in and of itself", as many have demonstrated by giving socially related reasons for their being against it. You're completely and utterly pulling that out of your ass.

[Godslayer Jillian]

Huh. Tell me how exactly I flip flip.

[Apathy's_Child]

Will do after you address the substance of my argument, instead of picking out a single word and ignoring the main thrust. Until you can be bothered to actually address my points as I have yours, I refuse to take the time to go through this thread finding quotes to illustrate a point you'll just ignore, instead picking out a single line to take issue with.

[Godslayer Jillian]

Dude, do you notice that you have done nothing but attack ME instead of MY ARGUMENT in your last four posts in which you try to accuse me of some stupid shit that has nothing to do with my argument?
Don't you find that hypocritical?
You want me to answer something, then ask me a fucking question. We've been on this forum too long to know that when someone says "you're avoiding my question", he's just trying to sound smart and superior without actually having said a fucking question.

[Apathy's_Child]

Okay then, if you can't take my arguments and respond to them point by point as I've mostly done with yours, I'll break it down for you.

Questions:

1. Back up your claim that everyone in this thread fears eugenics "in and of itself".
2. How do you envision eugenics working without disadvantaging those who cannot afford to dabble (since you're so adamant that the idea it will disadvantage ANYONE can only be believed by people who read too much sci-fi)?

[Godslayer Jillian]

Originally Posted by All Shall Be Judged

messing with traits like intelligence, appearance, et cetera, will simply create a super-race when carried to its logical conclusion.

Originally Posted by Mir

Because, if it were to happen, it would only be available to the super rich, and those with power. Equality would cease to exist in terms of scientific tangible. It would widen the rift between the top 1%, and everyone else.

Originally Posted by LaBelleDameSansMerci

Yeah. I don't like eugenics... We're better off without it.

Originally Posted by Despanan

You seriously don't see how a genetically altered race of supra-healthy, supra-intelligent, supra beautiful, wealthy Ubermensch wouldn't create some sort of caste system?

Originally Posted by KontanKarite

If you guys actually think eugenics is a good thing, remember, NONE of you will be one among the genetically elite. NONE of you.

Do I get to win already or do you want to keep trying?

[Apathy's_Child]

Care to answer question two before I point out the flaws among the quotations you yourself have picked (and that's before I even go looking for others which illustrate how right I am)? Because even when I broke it down as much as I possibly could, you STILL ignored a crucial point in the discussion. I really don't know how I can make this any simpler for you.

[Godslayer Jillian]

Stop being so fucking cryptic. This is an argument, not a game of poker.

"There's a crucial point in the discussion! But I won't tell you what it is, hehe"
Fuck that. Actually make an argument instead of trying to bullshit your way through.

2. How do you envision eugenics working without disadvantaging those who cannot afford to dabble (since you're so adamant that the idea it will disadvantage ANYONE can only be believed by people who read too much sci-fi)?
Why do you not envision the same natural inequalities today as disadvantaging people as the world is right now?
Why do you only complain if it's conscious?

[Apathy's_Child]

Originally Posted by Godslayer Jillian

Stop being so fucking cryptic. This is an argument, not a game of poker.

"There's a crucial point in the discussion! But I won't tell you what it is, hehe"

Let’s see:

Originally Posted by Apathy's_Child

Care to answer question two before I point out the flaws among the quotations you yourself have picked (and that's before I even go looking for others which illustrate how right I am)? Because even when I broke it down as much as I possibly could, you STILL ignored a crucial point in the discussion [I rather assumed, given that you’re always going on about how smart you are, that repeatedly referring to the point at hand as Question 2 was unnecessary]. I really don't know how I can make this any simpler for you.

As you can see, I DID tell you what the point in question was, genius. Quit trying to pass off your own poor comprehension skills as an attempt on my part to be obtuse.

The rest I’ll respond to later, when I have time to go back through the thread.

[Despanan]

Holy fuck, this is still going on?

Anyone notice how, when Jillian is backed into a corner he simply changes the subject, or declares his own "victory" and bases it on nothing?

I noticed.

[Godslayer Jillian]

Originally Posted by Despanan

Anyone notice how, when Jillian is backed into a corner he simply changes the subject, or declares his own "victory" and bases it on nothing?

Let's see what I wrote on my last post

2. How do you envision eugenics working without disadvantaging those who cannot afford to dabble (since you're so adamant that the idea it will disadvantage ANYONE can only be believed by people who read too much sci-fi)?
Why do you not envision the same natural inequalities today as disadvantaging people as the world is right now?
Why do you only complain if it's conscious?

Oh yeah, I'm sorry I changed the subject and began talking about eugenics.

[Despanan]

Wow, you answered one, simple, direct question with another question. Right. Brilliant. TOTALLY NOT EVASIVE AT ALL.

Face it Jill, you've been grasping at straws since the beginning. Its not surprising, as you are defending a defunct and discredited pseudo-science from the turn of the century. I mean, I know Goths are all into anachronism, but seriously Eugenics Apologism? Really Jill? REALLY?

[Godslayer Jillian]

We've been talking about eugenics and genetic engineering. You have been crying all throughout that it will inevitably lead into some form of a caste system.
You have argued all ways possible and you haven't actually answered the question I reposted above, so now you come out of the blue with saying "who the fuck cares? It's an old science"
Completely backstabbing the whole point of your arguments.
And yet I'm the one that's being evasive and changes the subject?

Fuck your hypocrisy.

[Despanan]

Ya know what the funny thing is Jill? Even if we are the hypocrites you claim us to be, that doesn't make us wrong.

Being a hypocrite does not mean that a person's argument is wrong. If a Doctor who smokes tells you not to smoke because it causes cancer he's still right. So yeah, you're STILL evading.

[Godslayer Jillian]

Stop talking about evasion when you would just give up on everything you said to declare "I don't care lol"
That's something SYL would do. Not you.
You have given no rational justification for hating eugenics and genetic engineering that couldn't be applied to any other form of technology.

[Despanan]

Please excuse the lateness of this reply, I wanted to sit down and spell this out as plainly as possible, and I didn't have time earlier.

Originally Posted by Godslayer Jillian

Stop talking about evasion when you would just give up on everything you said to declare "I don't care lol"
That's something SYL would do. Not you.
You have given no rational justification for hating eugenics and genetic engineering that couldn't be applied to any other form of technology.

What the hell gave you the impression I was saying that? And why do you keep comparing me to other Gnet members, we all know there's only one Despanan.

As for rational justification for not liking Eugenics (genetic engineering is another issue, so please don't confuse that) There are a plethora of reasons, from a methodology which strongly encourages racism to the intentional "shallowing" of our gene pool to the fact that I've actually read Inquiries into Human Faculty and Its Development and found both Galton's methodology and conclusions laughable (Do you know that he believed measles was a genetic disease?)

However, this is beside the point, Eugenics does not need me to "defeat it", It's dead, defunct, gone and it is never coming back. It is nothing but a sad, anachronistic relic of a more savage time, embraced only by people who think the "let's stop stupid people from breeding" joke is an actual, social philosophy. One would have to be a complete and utter 'tard to think otherwise.

I have been arguing about your continued denial that this philosophy could, and most likely would be used to exert a degree of coercive social pressure on the have-nots, as it has been in the past, and your idiotic assertion that if this kind of thing was effective, the upper-class wouldn't want it because it would magically "liberalize" their children. That is my purpose here: To beat the stupid out of you (or at least understand the fractured thought process which lead you to this idiotic conclusion) and in my opinion you have been going on and on, for pages and pages, backpedaling, evading, and changing the subject because you have no argument and are too proud to admit it.

Now for the love of God: answer Apathy's second question

[Despanan]

Fact Correction:

I went back and re-read an earlier post where it seems you were talking about genetic engineering and not eugenics with the "Intelligence = Liberal" comment (I still maintain that this is a massively dumb assertion, but seeing as how the Eugenics/Genetic engineering line has been getting blurrier as this thread has gone on, I've felt it necessary to point this out to avoid confusion).

So this particular bit:

I have been arguing about your continued denial that this philosophy could, and most likely would be used to exert a degree of coercive social pressure on the have-nots, as it has been in the past, and your idiotic assertion that if this kind of thing was effective, the upper-class wouldn't want it because it would magically "liberalize" their children.

Should read:

I have been arguing about your continued denial that this philosophy could, and most likely would be used to exert a degree of coercive social pressure on the have-nots, as it has been in the past, and, if a society that embraced this belief had access to genetic engineering the implementation there of would most likely result in a greater degree of social cleavage (heh.) and your idiotic assertion that if [Genetic engineering] was effective, the upper-class wouldn't want it because it would magically "liberalize" their children.

[Apathy's_Child]

Okay Jillian, let's take a look at some of the best quotes you could cherry-pick to support your argument.

Originally Posted by Godslayer Jillian

Originally Posted by All Shall Be Judged
messing with traits like intelligence, appearance, et cetera, will simply create a super-race when carried to its logical conclusion.

"Super-race" - those words allow you to take the quote out of context like it's all she posted. Let's look at the rest:

Originally Posted by All Shall Be Judged

If it were ALL humans, nothing. As it is, though, whilst perhaps screening for rare genetic disorders could become widely available (at least, to the more affluent inhabitants of First World countries), it's pretty much a given that IF it progressed to the level of eliminating genes such as ugliness or low IQ, you instantly create an underclass.

Now let's take underclass as what it is - a SOCIOECONOMIC term. If your brain jumped instantly to an image of the ugly and stupid dressed in bondage gear pouring drinks for the modified and grunting, maybe YOU'VE read too much sci-fi.

The Judge...... is talking about social concerns for the ways in which genetic engineering would work within a capitalist system.

Originally Posted by Godslayer Jillian

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mir
Because, if it were to happen, it would only be available to the super rich, and those with power. Equality would cease to exist in terms of scientific tangible. It would widen the rift between the top 1%, and everyone else.

This one speaks for itself. I really don't know how you managed to get "fear of eugenics in and of itself" from this perfectly valid concern about deepening the rift between those with money and those without.

Mir...... is talking about social concerns for the ways in which genetic engineering would work within a capitalist system.

Originally Posted by Godslayer Jillian

Quote:
Originally Posted by Despanan
You seriously don't see how a genetically altered race of supra-healthy, supra-intelligent, supra beautiful, wealthy Ubermensch wouldn't create some sort of caste system?

This flat statement is not the whole story - it's just one sentence of a perfectly logical argument. Check out the full explanation:

Originally Posted by Despanan

As I previously stated we've already seen an arbitrary upper and lower class break out into genocide over the suggestion that one was better than the other. If you actually managed to create a super-race limited only to the wealthy, it's going to lead to a caste system. It may be spoken, it may be unspoken but there will be an even greater gap between the wealthy and the poor than what we see now. This is undeniable dude.

Again - the concern is loading the dice in favor of the wealthy.

Despanan........... is talking about social concerns for the ways in which genetic engineering would work within a capitalist system.

Nowhere, in three out of five of your chosen quotes, do I see this convulsive, instinctive, unthinking fear you're talking about. These guys all raise valid points which, given your choice of their words to support your own view, it appears that you simply don't get.

Kontan and LaBelleDame - whilst they show no actual evidence of having considered these issues within their posts, I suspect that if questioned they would have better reasons for the way the react to eugenics than "I don't like it". However, even supposing they didn't, your argument still fails so hard it couldn't even stand up to "best of five".