anyone here care to dabate about Naziist policies, and whether or not not they should be enforced in today's society in order to bring about a superior race? lithium: I'm reading a book about a nazi death squad right now lithium3, do you need some? is he still alive? well what do you al think? what's your position, lithium? (gotta be on one of two sides in a proper debate) mongoloids serve no prupose in society should we exterminate them? If you avocate freedom, there is no debate. oh, I thought you were volunteering to be one of two debaters. Did you bring any chips? i think personally this world should start selective breeding the best of the best so are world can improve from this slouch maybe if we started right now the world would get better in 50-100 years i dont enforce the killing of any man/women. do you mean ppl with Down's Syndrome or Asians? but it would almost have its advantage i am not a nazi or racist in any way or form Ok, you breed them, I'll program them since AI will surpass the breeding program pretty quickly. glo^ what the fuck? a mongoloid what the hell would i be speaking about....not fucking mongolians my impression is that ppl with Down's Syndrome have more than the average share of loving kindness and compassion -- what's the world going to be like without their example? glo^ the world needs to give that love and compassion to those of us that can actually make a difference greedy lil thang, ain'tcha, lithium glo^ just debating * avigail sometimes is in favor of killing off all of the disabled Who gets to choose who mates? well think of where our world is heading right now? I can think of a number of very physically challenged people the world is much better off with. personally it is going in the slumps if you ask me i can only think of one, ord mary^ a panel of 100 of the worlds leading scholars would run society lithium -- they cant even run a university as a rule avigail no....that is just your o[pinion Yeah right! avi: Do you prefer "handicapped" or "physically challenged"? as a terminology? how does one get on the panel? most publications? highest salary at most prestigious university? best sideburns? glo^ you must be a world leader in your feild handicapped is too generic, could be mental from what i gather talking to profs, they all have a very low opinion of the ability of faculty senates to run universities The profs are all fringe, there is a reason they're in institutions. avigail that that is beside the topic? should the leet and intelligent rule over the inferior, and if so should the inferior be exterminated? and if so why? why not? Hitler tried selective breeding tue ord If only the breeding prevented hitler. mary: Also fairly unselective killing. lithium - the intelligent never get elected to anything mary^ Hitler SUCCEEDED in selective breeding, he shattered the Jew pop. but some jews were smart, and some jews were a positive impact on society jew pop? Right avigail I do not think there needs to be a vendeta like Hitler had....there needs to be a choosing jewish population ah well you can discuss i must rest hitler would have succedeed had he of tooken a different route in his military strategies chuklez touche` goodbye all The criteria is too arbitary, the judges too biased, won't work. see you tommorow for another debate Not choosing ...perhaps...just a limit om how many children to have to much emotions i think personally on this subject. Like china used to. A child license? prove you can be a tolerable parent? Perhaps hmm, that was no debate. A debate's supposed to last at least 40 minutes. That was merely a brief disturbance in the dining hall ;P ya humm Well, I could be the Nazi advocate? Probably not very convincing though. i am a kid with no brains for debating so..it wouldnt be much for me to keep on with this conversation wonder if he was going to get to proposing that ppl with bipolar syndrome (lithium's the main treatment, still) be sterilized to keep those genes out of the pool If the intelligent are that intelligent they can pack up and leave the "inferior" behind. ie., leave the planet. Is the purpose of the mass to be respected, just to pursue lowly human pleasures, while mankind could be acheiving great things with the availbable resources. one of my professors deliberately assigned ppl to debate against their own positions; we got the best debates out of that * avigail shoves to the head of the extermination line I like taking the other side in debates its so much fun hey! wait your turn! I stand down. in horticulture, artificial manipulation of the gene pool leads to interesting varieties which also become progressively weaker over generations; narrowing the gene pool has pitfalls Me first, avigail i have more claims to be exterminated than you do mary! But this is a known weakness, and line breeding does that, you need crosses too, still to select the best attributes without introducing too many recessives. hahaha avigail Man has been breeding things (good and bad) for a long time. Who wants to narrow it, control it is more accurate, if anything it would get larger . And will continue to breed the same way , Ord i mean it * avigail is on at least three Nazi extermition lists humm Avigail, have you been pissing off skinheads by bowling? bowling? How did you make such lists avigail ? Take the skinhead bowling, yea :-) <---- handicapped jewish intellectual three definite strikes against me Unless you work in their labs. <----------handicapped heinz 57 So breeding has desirable things, but the politcal elements are uncontrollable. So what are the ethics of selective genome based breedings? What would be the effect of giving complete choice to the masses? The easy choices would be elimination of disease, and cancer prone pieces. Eugenics. Hitler tried that Problem with Eugenics is very simple. It is nearly impossible to know which recessives may be being discarded when you selectively breed, and which of those recessives will ultimately prove useful to the population. Did the Nazis ever get to the point of demonstrating this? fortunately, no. but dog breeders have. Or are you talking about cattle and other domestic animals? I know a few breeders. It is quite difficult to eliminate a bad trait without emphasizing another bad trait, but not impossible. They work almost entirely on phenotypes. Ord, even so, eliminating one bad trait, can still lose an important set of genes Yes, by traditional breeding, but let say we know the particular faulty sequence, and just modify that. *nod* Now the evolutionary force is political. Then we are getting into possible genetic engineering Ord, yes. Very much so. then its political So the law will determine it, as it is attempting to control genetic manipulation. Which will fail. Does the law have the right to prevent me having children, of literally my own design? Currently it both claims it, and denys it, artificial, versus natural. or does the law prohibit body modification of a radical nature... People are doing a lot of heavy body modifications as it is, surgically; what happens when genetic engineering can do much more? I considered giving myself a spell bot, my spelling is so bad. it may not prohibit you from having them, it can prohibit you from keeping them or keeping them alive grow a pair of wings? The moratorium on human genetic manipulation (clones in particualar) amputate your legs in favour of an extra set of arms? one way to get a hand up I have many time wished for 4 arms, when working on a car. I doubt your brain could handle four arms, not without massive re-wiring, which someday would be possible Why not, it can handle 10 digits without a problem. it worked for crustaceans and others; evolved out/gone for mammalian species i'ts an interesting question, Di - but if the organism started out that way the pathways would just happen Could be added, after the fact too, but much more involved. Quarf, agreed. The question is, would the brain be able to open up new pathways after the fact? or would it also need some ... help Help, yes, but not the brain as much as the paths to the medula. well kiddies with extra limbs have nerves to them, and sensation; extra digits have sensation So do they errorously cut them off? just not proper musculatoure, so the nervous system has the capability; the brain is "scalable" Not designed for the additional limbs. So anyways - lets say we have a new gene sequence to allow better nerve healing, so you incorporate it? The criteria that our capitalistic society uses for decisions may not produce ethical decisions as far as gentics are concered,. I wouldn't mind being flamed, even if it is just an excuse for a conversation. I know how you feel , Ord * glo^ thinks it's true that some of the worst things humans have done have been intentional, and some of the best have been accidental * glo^ just throws that into the pot * |killjoy| would like to know about the best accidental things Yes, should that stop us from changing the status quo? that is true of genetic mutation and evolution as well - all totally accidental and selected after the fact yep, quarf, that's why I put it in there figured that I doubt if S.Hawkins would be as great a force if he wasn't handicapped. Focused his life. <|killjoy|> hawking was already a world-renouned math genius before he was diagnosed "natural selection" ... I suppose too it can be argued that human intention (with brain power and all that) has become part of the natural world and hence part of natural selection I often DO argue that :) with respect to human impact on the rest of the natural environment, for example Natural select by preference certainly has - look at human characteristics. in other species, too, I believe, Ord (the preference component) So why does this play into artifical manipulation of the genome? One doesn't prevent the other, they may actually encourage each other. Diversity is the desired goal for a lot of this. Should I have the privilege of determining consiously the genetic contents of my offspring? why not, Ord? Ord....you can already decide the gender Ok can I prevent my neighbor from having a predatory kid (talons or something)? <|killjoy|> interesting concept, children as customizable possessions Of course this will follow ability - what is to keep the main genome from forking, super-, and sub-classes. I think I am going to give up tonight, I don't seem to be writing english. <|killjoy|> imagine if your mom or dad had wanted an athelete, you wouldn't even be typing here tonight The cost tradeoff, or maybe you can't afford the smarter gene that M$ sells. <|killjoy|> i dunno, to me the thought that we're smarter than nature and should therefore control it is so far off i can't even empathize with it Well then if we're so stupid, then natural evolution will eliminate us in this manipulation line. > yeah, its a delusion much of the time ('smarter than nature') <|killjoy|> that implies some times we are smarter? <|killjoy|> and our preoccupation with fiddling will be our self-limiting factor I think our limit will be the bleeding edge we create, that will eventually be smarter than "man". Be it silicon or carbon. * |killjoy| votes for some sort of super-bug we create that ends up limiting us there have been a few - the plague in the middle ages we know about, AIDS now (just examples) This may be bloody stupid, but what happens when you put a terawatt into a single atomic collision, or make an Artifical Intelligence without our ethics, or we create a new "bug". Where we don't have a clue, but act anyways.