3 ms·
Yes I've heard his position before. It is probably correct but very difficult to solve for, it can take centuries, which is not what most people want to hear.
by internaut 10y ago
Yes I've heard his position before.
It is probably correct but very difficult to solve for, it can take centuries, which is not what most people want to hear. Cultural shifts are faster than biological evolution but are not always as fast as many people suppose.
Personally I believe in the use of eugenics for both blacks and whites in order to create an improved type of human. We know high IQ has, among others, the side affect of sharply declining propensity for violent crime. We know people with good health are able to think longer term than the sickly.
This goes way beyond the usual discussions but I think it is on the table whether people like it or not. I realize that the majority of people think this issue was laid to rest mid-twentieth century, but it is obvious those questions were always going to come back and it is only a matter of time. We've already been doing moderated forms of eugenics for decades except we've given it a hundred other names.
- Houshalter 10y agoEugenics is silly in an age where parents can edit the DNA of their babies. We have the technology to do this now, it just isn't widely available yet.