5 ms·

Amish and Mennonites have an extraordinary prevalence of genetic disease, as do orthodox jewish persons. Due to generations amongst generations of never breedin

Amish and Mennonites have an extraordinary prevalence of genetic disease, as do orthodox jewish persons. Due to generations amongst generations of never breeding outside their religious views they've caused havoc on their own genes.

vintermann 4y ago
"They've caused havoc on their own genes" - genes don't work like that. Here's one thing some people in this thread need to understand. Nature doesn't care. Nature doesn't judge you if you don't have kids. Your genes being slightly less prevalent down the timeline isn't a punishment. There's no high score table at the end of time saying "This is how good your genes did". Even the idea that they are "yours" is pretty incoherent. If stuff like who gets most kids worries you, you seriously need to look elsewhere for meaning in your lives. That's one thing you could learn from the Amish.
- mantas 4y ago
  That's pretty much how evolution works. Either your genes propagate and stay around, or not. Nature doesn't judge you, it just gets rid of you.
  - pyuser583 4y ago
    “My genes” are carried by a really large number of people. It’s pretty much guaranteed many will reproduce. I die because nature has selected humans to have a certain lifespan. In many species, almost no individuals reproduce. Worker ants never have children. Same with worker bees. Plenty of species select have some/most members not reproduce to protect assist species.
    - mantas 4y ago
      Ants are not mammals so procreation and societal structure is very different from humans. Same in bees etc. From evolutionary perspective, only your genes are „your“ genes. And from tribal perspective, procreation of each (quality) member is for the better. P.S. At some points in human history we had a similar only-chosen-procreate tendency. But it was overturned. I'd argue that for the better. Humans who have a stake in the future seem to care more about the society. Compared to ants-like society where warlord procreates and the rest of men just guards his harem.
  - vintermann 4y ago
    To repeat what I just told you: It eventually gets rid if you no matter what you do. (And no matter which subset of your genes you have incoherently decided to personally identify with.) And then none of it matters.
    - mantas 4y ago
      That's a very simplistic view of one as an individual. Which IMO is very wrong and a big problem in today's West. A human being is a continuous process both genetically and culturally. Your forefathers form who you are and you form people who will live long after you.
      - vintermann 4y ago
        Individuality's got nothing to do with it. Identify with some nebulous collective like your genes, your culture or your nation if you wish. They haven't got eternity in them either. They will all die too, it'll just take a little longer. And then it won't matter for anyone. There should be things which matter for their own sake, here and now, no matter what happens in the future. I can promise you that if you don't find them now, you won't find anything that matters in the future either.

vintermann 4y ago

"They've caused havoc on their own genes" - genes don't work like that. Here's one thing some people in this thread need to understand. Nature doesn't care. Nature doesn't judge you if you don't have kids. Your genes being slightly less prevalent down the timeline isn't a punishment. There's no high score table at the end of time saying "This is how good your genes did". Even the idea that they are "yours" is pretty incoherent. If stuff like who gets most kids worries you, you seriously need to look elsewhere for meaning in your lives. That's one thing you could learn from the Amish.

mantas 4y ago
That's pretty much how evolution works. Either your genes propagate and stay around, or not. Nature doesn't judge you, it just gets rid of you.
- pyuser583 4y ago
  “My genes” are carried by a really large number of people. It’s pretty much guaranteed many will reproduce. I die because nature has selected humans to have a certain lifespan. In many species, almost no individuals reproduce. Worker ants never have children. Same with worker bees. Plenty of species select have some/most members not reproduce to protect assist species.
  - mantas 4y ago
    Ants are not mammals so procreation and societal structure is very different from humans. Same in bees etc. From evolutionary perspective, only your genes are „your“ genes. And from tribal perspective, procreation of each (quality) member is for the better. P.S. At some points in human history we had a similar only-chosen-procreate tendency. But it was overturned. I'd argue that for the better. Humans who have a stake in the future seem to care more about the society. Compared to ants-like society where warlord procreates and the rest of men just guards his harem.
- vintermann 4y ago
  To repeat what I just told you: It eventually gets rid if you no matter what you do. (And no matter which subset of your genes you have incoherently decided to personally identify with.) And then none of it matters.
  - mantas 4y ago
    That's a very simplistic view of one as an individual. Which IMO is very wrong and a big problem in today's West. A human being is a continuous process both genetically and culturally. Your forefathers form who you are and you form people who will live long after you.
    - vintermann 4y ago
      Individuality's got nothing to do with it. Identify with some nebulous collective like your genes, your culture or your nation if you wish. They haven't got eternity in them either. They will all die too, it'll just take a little longer. And then it won't matter for anyone. There should be things which matter for their own sake, here and now, no matter what happens in the future. I can promise you that if you don't find them now, you won't find anything that matters in the future either.