While I don't have a problem with eugenics as a purely philosophical thought exercise, actually implementing it is another question. It's pure hubris to think w

While I don't have a problem with eugenics as a purely philosophical thought exercise, actually implementing it is another question. It's pure hubris to think we understand humans -- at the physical, psychological, or spiritual level -- enough to know what constitutes superiority. It's further hubris to think that removing "inferior" humans will improve the overall state of humanity. If you haven't already, read A Brave New World because it works as a thought experiment of intentionally constraining the number of elite humans and artificially breeding massive numbers of lessor/inferior humans for the tasks beneath the interest and dignity of the Alpha Class. One of the side stories in that book is that the Alpha Class rules tried an experiment where an island was populated with only Alphas and they very rapidly descended into civil war because, each recognizing their ability and superiority, nobody wanted to work for anyone else. A moral problem that can flow from eugenics as a thought exercise is considering certain groups of humans as less-than, inferior, or not worth consuming our resources. Once you accept that possibility it's only a matter of time before someone promotes or enacts policy to rid the world of the lessors. See the lessons learned from Nazi Germany or the Armenian Purge at the hands of the Young Turks, the wholesale genocide of the Celts by the Romans, etc. We either value human beings and human life or we start defining who needs to die.