Eugenics

[Maxmars]

Why?

It was given a bad name by so called intellectuals of the last century but as a philosophy it's been around for ever. Animal husbandry...

Dr's still highly discourage certain people from breeding but thankfully nobody has the right to stop reproduction, for humans anyway. But yeah, inbreeding shouldn't be happening, babies shouldn't be born with HIV, we probably should have licenses to breed too.

Fair enough....

My reasons why may be due to my own failing of understanding of a way to construct or conceptualize the "purpose" of this philosophy.

"Philosophy" as a word has a long history of abused meaning... "way of life"... "love of wisdom"... "study of thoughts"... but NEVER before this "justifying animal husbandry methodology on human lives."

I would have thought the idea of improving our collective human condition is laudable on it's face, until it becomes destructive of the natural evolution that has been taking place for millennia.

Philosophy does not, as I understand it, displace nature.

I would liken the eugenics movement to any other movement that precludes personal sovereignty and acts as an executor and propagator of targeted human death sentences - as a primary driver of action.

Nazi-ism isn't a philosophy... Pol Pot's culling of a quarter of the Khmer Rouge's population... NOT a philosophy...
at least in my opinion, philosophies aren't "about" the value of destroying life in bulk... for an outcome which is only meaningful 'philosophically.'

In fact, no other "philosophy" known to man calls for the blanket elimination of human life which does not meet "our philosophically conceived standard."

Personally, I think eugenics is a 'cover' for a more sinister and cynical outlook about the value of human life.

[Karl12]

Personally, I think eugenics is a 'cover' for a more sinister and cynical outlook about the value of human life.

Yes mate it inarguably is.

:beer:

[Ray1990]

Fair enough....

My reasons why may be due to my own failing of understanding of a way to construct or conceptualize the "purpose" of this philosophy.

"Philosophy" as a word has a long history of abused meaning... "way of life"... "love of wisdom"... "study of thoughts"... but NEVER before this "justifying animal husbandry methodology on human lives."

I would have thought the idea of improving our collective human condition is laudable on it's face, until it becomes destructive of the natural evolution that has been taking place for millennia.

Philosophy does not, as I understand it, displace nature.

I would liken the eugenics movement to any other movement that precludes personal sovereignty and acts as an executor and propagator of targeted human death sentences - as a primary driver of action.

Nazi-ism isn't a philosophy... Pol Pot's culling of a quarter of the Khmer Rouge's population... NOT a philosophy...
at least in my opinion, philosophies aren't "about" the value of destroying life in bulk... for an outcome which is only meaningful 'philosophically.'

In fact, no other "philosophy" known to man calls for the blanket elimination of human life which does not meet "our philosophically conceived standard."

Personally, I think eugenics is a 'cover' for a more sinister and cynical outlook about the value of human life.

The philosophy of eugenics would be thoughts and ideas based around the improvement of the human species, all I was saying is that as an idea and thought it's been used prior to the invention of the word eugenics.

Things exist before we coin a term for them. The meaning of words change with time too so if the word philosophy is being abused so is a grand proportion of your lexicon. Linguistics, isn't it aweful.

The thing about improving anything is your understanding could be flawed and the information sorely lacking. Spartans thought they were improving themselves killing babies, the Nazis used highly flawed 'science' and dog breeders are just sick #s, joking about the last one... Somewhat. Speaking of natural evolution, what do you consider natural?

Also, why should humans adhere to natural/nature when the majority of our existence is technically unnatural? Next to nothing you eat can be found naturally in nature.

Eugenics is just a word, philosophy is just a word and so is Nazism. All invented by man to encapsulate just what the hell we're going on about. Construction is just a word too and I can apply philosophy to it. There's a systemic approach to construction based on knowledge, study it and you'll find that ethics, sustainability and all sorts of things can be applied to their little field of knowledge. Starts to feel like there's a philosophy of sorts to their reasoning.

Maybe I should improve my language skills... Eugenic-like actions have been performed throughout history, many of these actions were based upon limited understanding of the time although generally the idea was based upon improving the human species, an activity which has been thoroughly practiced upon other species by humans. Furthermore, it is my personal belief that humans, based upon their limited understanding throughout history have systematically altered nature (and thus themselves) in a manner that can only be described as detrimental. This 'understanding' that humans have developed could potentially be called a philosophy although to be more distinct I would probably have to call their understanding to be closer to a proto-philosophy whereas eugenics itself is a modern word that encapsulates many thoughts, ideas, study (which was wrong) and systematic approaches to implementing it's unscientific ideology. Something I'd define as a "philosophy of eugenics" although admittedly it might be more akin to a "proto-philosophy".

[Ray1990]

Mate the families that initially came up with 'germ plasm' idea were initially interbred - go figure.

Is there anything you inherently disagree with in this video?

Anthropology is the absolute opposite of 'eugenics' and check out Fabian death panels and things like Aktion T4 program if you disagree.


https://denyignorance.com/Thread-Nazi-Eu...=Bioethics

Cheers.

I disagree with the video. I'd probably highly disagree with a person like that if I ever had the chance to question their motivations and reasoning, I'd probably disagree with their methodology too.

Anthropology is the study of humanity, the way we act and stuff. Some form of 'eugenics' has been practiced in most cultures. Eugenics is a modern word birthed from a world of science but as a 'philosophy' it would be "ideas and thoughts surrounding the betterment of a species" which will have been around since the ideas of improving animals via selective breeding.

I feel a sense of wires being crossed here. As if I'm talking about religion whilst you're actually talking about the church.

[Maxmars]

One last pushback... thanks for indulging me.



I expected that there was a series of arguments which support the notion that the direction and focus of eugenics should be to focus on culling...rather than actually actively living a better life.  What does this "philosophy" actually "affirm?"

However why is the shining moment of eugenic manifestation the dump truck full of the corpses of undesirable,  the limp dead bodies of children with ugly birthmarks... and of course the bodies of those who no one loved enough to save, because you know it will come to that. 

Eugenics will also be applied eventually by more enlightened 'eugenicists' who come to the mindset that left-handed people are genetically undesirables, or people that "our leaders" don't 'want' (think Jews, Uyghurs, 'poor people,' the unvaccinated, etc.)

The 'breeding improvement' by subtraction principle is grandly pragmatic, for a bushel of chicks, a heard of sheep, or someone concerned with product quality.
Where in Eugenics does it say that the human condition empowers murdering the guiltless for their afflictions, prohibiting human endeavors, value judging an unrealized future?

I think the focus of the study of the human condition would not be remedied by a death strategy... nor a process to 'segregate' "undesirables" (deplorables?) into a meat grinder.

The misuse of Eugenics as a "intellectual" shield to perform and orchestrate life-ending processes seems to deny the idea that life purpose is not to serve man...but to experience and witness human reality as we've made it.

"Jettison" the "lower quality"/high maintenance people helps only those who are not jettisoned. 
Eugenics says if someone don't measure up... they're outta here!"

Never mind that the tiny little baby brain is a potentially brilliant person, all that potential killed by hubris and presumption.

Yeah... no.

[Please accept my apologies if I accidentally made it seem personal, like I was judging or commenting on you... I really appreciate this chat!  ]

[Maxmars]

One last pushback... thanks for indulging me.



I expected that there was a series of arguments which support the notion that the direction and focus of eugenics should be to focus on culling...rather than actually actively living a better life.  What does this "philosophy" actually "affirm?"

However why is the shining moment of eugenic manifestation the dump truck full of the corpses of undesirable,  the limp dead bodies of children with ugly birthmarks... and of course the bodies of those who no one loved enough to save, because you know it will come to that. 

Eugenics will also be applied eventually by more enlightened 'eugenicists' who come to the mindset that left-handed people are genetically undesirables, or people that "our leaders" don't 'want' (think Jews, Uyghurs, 'poor people,' the unvaccinated, etc.)

The 'breeding improvement' by subtraction principle is grandly pragmatic, for a bushel of chicks, a heard of sheep, or someone concerned with product quality.
Where in Eugenics does it say that the human condition empowers murdering the guiltless for their afflictions, prohibiting human endeavors, value judging an unrealized future?

I think the focus of the study of the human condition would not be remedied by a death strategy... nor a process to 'segregate' "undesirables" (deplorables?) into a meat grinder.

The misuse of Eugenics as a "intellectual" shield to perform and orchestrate life-ending processes seems to deny the idea that life purpose is not to serve man...but to experience and witness human reality as we've made it.

"Jettison" the "lower quality"/high maintenance people helps only those who are not jettisoned. 
Eugenics says if someone don't measure up... they're outta here!"

Never mind that the tiny little baby brain is a potentially brilliant person, all that potential killed by hubris and presumption.

Yeah... no.

[Please accept my apologies if I accidentally made it seem personal, like I was judging or commenting on you... I really appreciate this chat!  ]

[UltraBudgie]

It is interesting to think about eugenics in terms of epigenetics. How life experience can change the expression of genes, even as inherited intergenerationally. Could this be used to "sculpt" societies, or as a weapon? Certainly every generation seems to have its traumas (9/11, covid, etc).

Many Holocaust survivors have PTSD and other emotional disorders, and it's well-known that children of traumatized people are at increased risk for PTSD. Yehuda, long eager to study the children of concentration camp survivors, took the connection one step further in research published Sept. 1, 2016, in Biological Psychiatry.

She and her colleagues showed for the first time in humans that epigenetic changes caused by exposure to trauma can be passed on to children born after the event—in this case Holocaust survivors and their adult children. Epigenetic processes alter the expression of a gene without producing changes in the DNA sequence and can be transmitted to the next generation.

"What happens to our parents, or perhaps even to our grandparents or previous generations, may help shape who we are on a fundamental molecular level."

Her study yields insight into how severe psychophysiological trauma can have intergenerational effects. "These observations suggest that parental trauma is a relevant contributor to offspring biology," Yehuda says.

The researchers focused on FKBP5, a stress gene linked to PTSD, depression, and mood and anxiety disorders. The results suggest that Holocaust exposure had an effect on FKBP5 methylation—a mechanism that controls the gene's expression—that was observed in parents exposed to the horrors of the concentration camps, as well as their offspring, many of whom showed signs of depression and anxiety.

https://www.research.va.gov/currents/1016-3.cfm

[BeyondKnowledge]

Has anyone considered that the transgender medical procedures as a form of eugenics? Eliminate the transgenders by giving them what they want before they reproduce. Sterilizing those that want it without explaining what is actually going on.

I have wondered why so many mothers and grandmothers want to end their family lines. Even though they may look the gender they want to be, they can't reproduce if they have gone through the entire procedure.

They had a segment on AI genetic analysis of embryos before emplanting on Fox News last night. Now you can select what you want in a child from those made by invetro fertilization. Selecting based on probabilities from generics.

They brought up the morality of not testing the unborn for genetic defects. Soon we will be able to select what we want in our children. Now there is eugenics for you. Throw out the imperfect, no matter what your idea of perfection is.

[Sirius]

Has anyone considered that the transgender medical procedures as a form of eugenics? Eliminate the transgenders by giving them what they want before they reproduce. Sterilizing those that want it without explaining what is actually going on.

I have wondered why so many mothers and grandmothers want to end their family lines. Even though they may look the gender they want to be, they can't reproduce if they have gone through the entire procedure.

They had a segment on AI genetic analysis of embryos before emplanting on Fox News last night. Now you can select what you want in a child from those made by invetro fertilization. Selecting based on probabilities from generics.

They brought up the morality of not testing the unborn for genetic defects. Soon we will be able to select what we want in our children. Now there is eugenics for you. Throw out the imperfect, no matter what your idea of perfection is.

That sounds straight out of the dark ages, would you like to hear a tale?

I don't know what is the big deal in any case, we have been doing selective breeding since forever. Some blood colorers are even prised.

[Maxmars]

That sounds straight out of the dark ages, would you like to hear a tale?

I don't know what is the big deal in any case, we have been doing selective breeding since forever. Some blood colorers are even prised.

I have to admit ignorance, I thought "selective breeding" was selective breeding...
and "eugenics" is a doctrinal document explaining the righteousness of why
humans should conform to that paradigm.

We are stewards of animals...
but I cannot consent to be "managed"
by any ideology... and eugenics breeds random exclusion...
Eugenicists see human birth as a deficit.
How detached must one be to create a single gestalt for all human existence... We are cattle? (Sparta... much?)

Sorry, that might read as unkind... it is not so intended.
That's me trying to be funny...
I know... fail.