3 ms·
Are you actually arguing for eugenics?
by Lariscus 6y ago
Are you actually arguing for eugenics?
- alexashka 6y agoNo. I'm saying that anyone who gasps at how "unethical" other human beings are, wants eugenics, unless they're a real idiot who can't connect the dots to see that the only way to "fix" unethical behaviour is eugenics. I should say, most people who use the word "unethical" are of the real idiot variety. Arriving at eugenics as a potential solution to most of people's problems should automatically grant you a million dollars because it indicates interest in other people's well being and independent thought. Arriving at the attempt at eugenics being a really bad idea should land you another ten million, so that you can spend the rest of your life explaining to those behind you, why ideas that seem too good to be true, are too good to be true, so that we don't get another fundamentalist idiot like Hitler or Stalin in power.
- Lariscus 6y agoI see did not get that from you original comment but please enlighten me on how demanding ethical behaviour from software engineers leads to a eugenics program.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- alexashka 6y agoThe level of idiocy required to believe that 'demanding ethical behaviour from software engineers' is at all a reasonable request, enables other idiotic ideas, such as 'demand ethical behaviour of all people' because why stop at software engineers, which naturally leads to eugenics if you believe some people are born with unethical tendencies that can't be corrected past birth, due to genetics. Now I understand that you don't think demanding ethical behaviour is an idiotic idea. What you don't know is that this idiotic idea has been rebutted a billion times already. We have an entire branch of philosophy dedicated to it, called moral philosophy. Let me save you some time: Go ahead and define ethical. Define how you plan to demand. Explain how you make sure those enforcing the 'demanding' themselves don't become unethical and how you make sure you don't end up in a worse spot than where you started by attempting to demand something you can't even define or even if you could, you could never get everyone to agree with your definition because gasp, people thinks differently. Here's a last kicker for you - suppose in your fairyland that cannot be, you did demand ethical behaviour and people listened, you know, because you're a violent dictator because nobody would listen otherwise. Another country goes ahead and does the unethical, gets ahead of your little ethical country, comes and crushes you, enslaves your ethical people and puts your head on a stick. How do you propose to win a zero-sum game of power if acting ethically dooms you to losing, or are you ok with going extinct in your noble ethical fashion? Good luck convincing the rest of your little ethical country to live ethically in fear of getting pillaged, raped and enslaved by the neighbours, in the name of ethics.