I thought you were going to advocate for UBI instead of school spending so that poor people get a better life instead of highly funded education etc that does nothing for them.
I find your talk about genetic engineering for intelligence to be basically a form of genocide. Genetic engineering like this wouldn’t be much different than sterilizing them and giving them a smarter baby. Their child I assume would still look like them but their child’s mind would be completely different than themselves. Granted survival of the fittest is basically natures way of genociding the less fit.
In a lot of ways I feel like being mentally different from ones children would far less be like them than if they were physically different. If you changed my child’s dna so they were physically Lebron James but everything that goes into the mind was me then I think I would connect with them more than if they looked like me but were mentally different. They would have some different experiences. Like I had 2 years where I was bullied heavily and I am going to guess that wouldn’t happen to them. Or getting cut from the basketball team.
I find your talk about genetic engineering for intelligence to be basically a form of genocide.
By that definition evolution by natural selection is genocide. Anything that caused differential reproduction of genotypes could be considered genocide even.
A world without natural selection would lead to an accumulation of deleterious variants that would quickly lead to the extinction of any species. If I was given a choice between health or sickness, intelligence or ignorance, and life or death, I'd choose life every time.
The question is over what kinds of people we are going to make in the future, not over who to cull now. I don't think all beings have an equal right to life.
This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a
court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to
optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.
The weekly Culture War threads host the most
controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are
appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy;
if in doubt, post!
Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts.
You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.
Why are you called The Motte?
A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently,
it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey",
originally identified by
philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial
but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens
this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for
the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired
propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."
On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.
New post guidelines
If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it.
A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts
such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a
submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).
Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or
significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
I thought you were going to advocate for UBI instead of school spending so that poor people get a better life instead of highly funded education etc that does nothing for them.
I find your talk about genetic engineering for intelligence to be basically a form of genocide. Genetic engineering like this wouldn’t be much different than sterilizing them and giving them a smarter baby. Their child I assume would still look like them but their child’s mind would be completely different than themselves. Granted survival of the fittest is basically natures way of genociding the less fit.
In a lot of ways I feel like being mentally different from ones children would far less be like them than if they were physically different. If you changed my child’s dna so they were physically Lebron James but everything that goes into the mind was me then I think I would connect with them more than if they looked like me but were mentally different. They would have some different experiences. Like I had 2 years where I was bullied heavily and I am going to guess that wouldn’t happen to them. Or getting cut from the basketball team.
By that definition evolution by natural selection is genocide. Anything that caused differential reproduction of genotypes could be considered genocide even.
It probably is. The difference here is it would be people deciding to do it to themselves. It’s the Gattaca endgame
A world without natural selection would lead to an accumulation of deleterious variants that would quickly lead to the extinction of any species. If I was given a choice between health or sickness, intelligence or ignorance, and life or death, I'd choose life every time.
You're not being very clear. Would you prefer to be sick, ignorant yet alive rather than die for the sake of the "health of the species"?
The question is over what kinds of people we are going to make in the future, not over who to cull now. I don't think all beings have an equal right to life.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link