Position:Home>Philosophy> Arguments for/against state sponsered Eugenics (improvement of human hereditary

I'm not opposed to "eugenics," if you wish to call it that!.
I am opposed to it being state sponsored!.
Let the market decide what the consumer wants!. But the law shall always be the judge&jury who decide ethics!.

Do not let ethics stand in the way of opening the market, but make the market stick to scientific ethics and get back to the secular world we set for ourselves when Galileo argued so hard for heliocentricity!.

I disaprove of the word "eugenics" because it sounds too much like other words!. It is "metaphysical genetics," and I guess I prefer the more descriptive phrase!.

But politics should never play a part in it!. How do I know!? Political science, you know, is a branch of Philosophy!? But since no politician is trained in it anymore, we must leave the "politics" out!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

---

---

Improvement is a good thing, however its too easy to get taken to extremes and forget about compassion and respect for people's rights!.

Don't forget that Eugenics was pioneered by the Nazis and they did some absolutely despicable things in the guise of trying to improve human genetics!.

Clearly you are not a Nazi and thats not what I'm trying to say but people get carried away even with the best of intentions!. The road to hell!.!.!.

Even with the stipulations that you have stated, I would be hesitant!. Though I have often thought that it would be a good idea to introduce some kind of reproduction 'licence' (after all we need a licence to fish or to drive a car, why not with something much more serious like child rearing!?) However the problem comes with enforcement!. How can we enforce these rules without squashing people's rights!?

There's a much more subtle form of Eugenics which I think is more acceptable, namely just choose a good mate with which to have children!. Humans tend to do this subconciously anyway!.

Controlling people's reproduction is a very tricky thing!. I think concentrating on fulfilling our current genetic potential is a better way to improve the human condition!. (ie - most people only use a small fraction of their current potential and so we don't really need better genetics, we need better education and self awareness)!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

---

---

Actually, I piss people off when I bring it up, becuase I think as long as civilisation has decided to become more integrated, the least we could to to make improvements is to enhance its population!.

My proposal involves screening people for personality types!. Not everyone (meaning most people) do not have what it takes, character-wise, to raise a mentally healthy, high achieving human contender!. Those who do should recieve the benefits (but not be coddled, that will create more problems), but those who do not should at least be given temporary sterilisation until they, at a later date, are screened again and pass as competent!.

I'm not for the voluntary aspect of it so much, because I think it won't solve the problem!. China's one child policy didn't work!.!.but it did help to decrease the morale of the entire culture by throwing second children into dumpsters or orphanages to die, all the while the one child that was allowed became a nation of spoiled, introverted brats insensitive to the outside world!.

Anytime a euthanasia programme is proposed, however, there are always those in a position of power who will abuse and contort it to fit their own agenda, and it will always devolve back into the primal tribal struggle!.!.!.!."My tribe is better than yours!.!.!.Your tribe deserves to be exterminated"

And honestly, you can never keep a good idea that catches on in the hands of good people!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

---

---

The question is: Whose Human genetic qualities are good enough or superior enough to make them eligible to define the Human genectic qualites for anyone else!?

The world natural resources are are abundant enough for all, but are hoarded by the few to oppress the many!. If one group intends to live forever, from where will will they obtain the spare parts!?

Here are are some qoutes and bibliography from websites:

"Eugenics literally means "good breeding"!. It is defined as the study of agencies under social control that may improve or impair the racial qualities of future generations either physically or mentally!."

"What is "eugenics" anyway!?

Eugenics is a branch of biology that first began to be developed in the late nineteenth century in England after Darwin's evolutionary theories had begun to be accepted!."

"UPDATE: In the 21st century, Americans are seeing a rebirth of neo-eugenics as we debate the ethics of cloning and genetic manipulation in an effort to combat disease and illness!. The temptation remains for modern day eugenicists to weed out perceived "undesirable" human traits!. Who will become the "breeders" and who will become the "undesirables!?"

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Baumeister, Alfred A!. and Butterfield, Earl, Residential Facilities for the Mentally Retarded (New York, 1971)

Carlson, Lewis H!. and Colburn, George A!., In Their Place: White America Defines Her Minorities, 1850-1950 (New York, 1972)

Chase, Allan, The Legacy of Malthus: The Social Costs of the New Scientific Racism (New York, 1977)

Davenport, Charles, Heredity in Relation to Eugenics (New York, 1911)

Davis, John and Sarason, Seymour B!., Psychological Problems in Mental Deficiency (New York, 1969)

Deutsch, Albert, The Mentally Ill in America: A History of Their Care and Treatment From Colonial Times (New York, 1949)

Farber, Bernard, Mental Retardation: Its Social Context and Social Consequences (Boston, 1968)

Goldman, Eric, Rendezvous With Destiny: A History of Modern American Reform (New York, 1956)

Gossett, Thomas F!., Race: The History of an Idea in America (Dallas, 1963)

Gusfield, Joseph S!., Symbolic Crusade (Urbana, 1963)

Haller, Mark H!., Eugenics: Hereditarian Attitudes in American Thought (New Brunswick, 1963)

Higham, John,Strangers in the Land: Patterns of American Nativism, 1860-1925 (New Brunswick, 1955)

Hofstadter, Richard, Social Darwinism in American Thought (New York, 1965)

Kanner, Leo, A History of the Care and Study of the Mentally Retarded (Springfield, 1964)

Mowry, George, The Era of Theodore Roosevelt and the Birth of Modern America, 1900-1912 (New York, 1962)

Nash, Roderick, Nervous Generation: American Thought, 1917-1930 (Chicago, 1970

Nevins, Allan, The Emergence of Modern America, 1865-1878 (New York, 1927)

Pickens, Donald K!., Eugenics and the Progressives (Nashville, 1968)

Pickens, Donald K!., "The Sterilization Movement: The Search for Purity in Mind and State", Phylon 28 (Spring 1967), 78-91!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

---

---