![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Why is eugenics so attractive to people, even - especially - educated people?
I'm a biologist by training, a geneticist. I know the history of eugenics. It's not particularly pretty, even before the rise of the totalitarian regime in 1930s Germany.
The 'dream' of biologically 'cleansing' the human population of 'unfit' individuals much as we might when breeding cattle is more than a question of morality. It's not wrong just because the Nazis did it, or the Americans.
The problem is two-fold. Social, and Biological.
The Biological problem is that we just don't know enough to be sure of what we're doing. It's one thing to selectively breed sheep or cattle or wheat. It's another to suggest that we can remove all genetic 'abnormalities' from human populations. We can't do it with sheep or cattle or wheat, and we've been working on those for hundreds and thousands of years.
Even biotechnology is not perfect.
The other problem is Social. We are not uniform in our belief or acceptance of what is 'normal' or 'abnormal'. We don't even necessarily accept those distinctions. Who would get to decide?
Eugenics and it's biological and sociological problems have been grist for the sci-fi/speculative fiction mill since the early days of the genre. There are more problems than solutions.
But fundamentally, if we think that the majority can - or should - choose for the minority, I highly recommend you relive the past few thousand years of human history. Because, at the end of the day, there is no fucking way the majority gets to have that much say over people - not while we even vaguely have human rights left.
War on Terror be fucked. The scary shit is happening right here. In people's heads.
I'm a biologist by training, a geneticist. I know the history of eugenics. It's not particularly pretty, even before the rise of the totalitarian regime in 1930s Germany.
The 'dream' of biologically 'cleansing' the human population of 'unfit' individuals much as we might when breeding cattle is more than a question of morality. It's not wrong just because the Nazis did it, or the Americans.
The problem is two-fold. Social, and Biological.
The Biological problem is that we just don't know enough to be sure of what we're doing. It's one thing to selectively breed sheep or cattle or wheat. It's another to suggest that we can remove all genetic 'abnormalities' from human populations. We can't do it with sheep or cattle or wheat, and we've been working on those for hundreds and thousands of years.
Even biotechnology is not perfect.
The other problem is Social. We are not uniform in our belief or acceptance of what is 'normal' or 'abnormal'. We don't even necessarily accept those distinctions. Who would get to decide?
Eugenics and it's biological and sociological problems have been grist for the sci-fi/speculative fiction mill since the early days of the genre. There are more problems than solutions.
But fundamentally, if we think that the majority can - or should - choose for the minority, I highly recommend you relive the past few thousand years of human history. Because, at the end of the day, there is no fucking way the majority gets to have that much say over people - not while we even vaguely have human rights left.
War on Terror be fucked. The scary shit is happening right here. In people's heads.
infuriated
(no subject)
(no subject)
How can we be individuals in a world were we are all the same.
There are many more examples of eugenics than just the Germans and Americans. The French tried it at one stage...
I like diversity, it keeps us unique!
i'm unique, just like everyone else
they have a strong herding instinct [aka tribalism]. hence the alternative label of sheeple.
i'm uncommonly aware of the extent of the eugenics fad of late 1800s and early 1900s. i have studied the eugenics movement as a scientist (geneticist) and a sociologist (lawyer).
any way you look at it, it is fraught with problems that overwhelm the original issues.
of course you do :)
(no subject)
(no subject)
most of the mods done are to enhance the 'saleability' of hte product. not the 'consumer experience' ... seems it only matters that we buy the stuff, not that we enjoy it.
i know a child who thought tomatoes were supposed to be tasteless. a warm homegrown version picked off the vine had her literally moaning in amazement at the taste. [and being synaesthetic, marvelling at the music as well.]
her parents have become avid home gardeners at her persistent insistence :)
(no subject)
That's quite sad kids think that, no wonder in western countries they all turn to fast food laden with additives for the taste. A few years back potato peelings thrown in the garden would produce good potatoes, not so anymore. I am very anti-GM. Not only for those reasons but for the unknown health reasons, plus well eventually {even though people say I'm nutso for saying it _& I have been flamed on LJ for saying it hehe} whoever controls the production of food will end up controlling the world.
(no subject)
many small children have known nothing but shopping centres and processed foods. it is an interesting experiement we have been doing on ourselves for the past few generations. one that has me wondering how connected this new culture of ours is to the 'rise' in certain socio-behavioural 'issues'.
i'm less concerned about microdoses of mercury compounds than the steady supply of complex chemicals in our diets. particualarly when most single-event toxins require significant doses or toxicity to have lasting effects on the generally very plastic physiology of small children [we can thank adaptive evolution for that, if the opposite was true, we'd have been extinct long ago.]
(no subject)
His farm was downwind from a GM rapeseed plot.
(no subject)