/sci/ - Science & Math » Thread #12444353

34KiB, 495x619, images (3).jpg

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO

Anonymous Thu 10 Dec 00:01:41 2020 No.12444353 View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>12444380 >>12444732 >>12444772 >>12445121 >>12445220 >>12448178 >>12448298 >>12448336 >>12448396 >>12448604 >>12448680 >>12449351 >>12450386

scientifically speaking, does eugenics work?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 10 Dec 2020 00:05:02 No.12444380 Report

Quoted By: >>12444648

>>12444353
In what way? Does it achieve its goals? Yes. Does it work for the benefit of society? Depends.

Ad Lockhorst

Ad Lockhorst Thu 10 Dec 2020 00:32:48 No.12444648 Report

Quoted By: >>12446196

>>12444380
Yup. Eliminating SOME hereditary conditions would be a very good thing. But not even all (you get sickle cell anaemia if both parents have the haemoglobin beta gene, but having just one beta offers increased malaria protection.

So SCA can be avoided easily enough [with a simple test] but it might be a bad idea to eliminate the gene that causes it).

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 10 Dec 2020 00:37:06 No.12444690 Report

Quoted By:

It does work. Just look at the animals and plants humans have bred. The same can be done with humans. It can be done without force, too, for all you moralfags out there.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 10 Dec 2020 00:41:10 No.12444717 Report

Quoted By: >>12444786 >>12446258

>eugenics in 2020
A man who has a driver's license is statistically more likely to die than a man with no eyes

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 10 Dec 2020 00:43:18 No.12444732 Report

Quoted By: >>12448153 >>12448524

>>12444353
In theory, Yes.
In practice, No.
Just look at what we did to dogs in the name of fashion in the last 200 years and imagine what 200 years of popular eugenics will look like.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 10 Dec 2020 00:47:41 No.12444772 Report

Quoted By:

>>12444353
yes, see "food animals"
but you have to be very cautious for what traits you want to select or you might end up with a lot of very unpleasant adverse effects and dysfunctionality

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 10 Dec 2020 00:49:14 No.12444786 Report

Quoted By: >>12444836

>>12444717
It's about IQ bro. Society will go down the shitter if low IQ people keep on growing in relative numbers.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 10 Dec 2020 00:55:06 No.12444836 Report

Quoted By: >>12444853

>>12444786
That's what the covid vaccine is for

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 10 Dec 2020 00:57:06 No.12444853 Report

Quoted By: >>12444860

>>12444836
covid vaccine is a great iq filter, because you can immediately tell sub 80 iq antivaxxers apart when they start reeeeeing

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 10 Dec 2020 00:58:21 No.12444860 Report

Quoted By: >>12444871

>>12444853
I admit that you would have no fewer children if you took the vaccine

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 10 Dec 2020 00:59:21 No.12444871 Report

Quoted By:

>>12444860
I agree. 0*a=0 for all a

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 10 Dec 2020 01:38:24 No.12445121 Report

Quoted By:

>>12444353
Might run into some problems after a few generations

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 10 Dec 2020 01:59:44 No.12445220 Report

Quoted By:

>>12444353
yes, we already did it with thousands of animals and plants

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 10 Dec 2020 05:12:52 No.12446196 Report

Quoted By:

>>12444648
just genocide mosquitoes already

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 10 Dec 2020 05:16:45 No.12446216 Report

Quoted By:

Yes. You will however hear a lot of mental gymnastics copes about how it couldn't work, for the exact same reasons you will hear similar copes about how human evolution stopped from the neck up 200,000 years ago.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 10 Dec 2020 05:26:32 No.12446258 Report

Quoted By: >>12448301

>>12444717
a man who has cystic fibrosis is statistically more likely to die than one without
too bad we can't eugenics that gene away, huh

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 10 Dec 2020 15:59:15 No.12448153 Report

Quoted By:

>>12444732
well I'd still say it "worked" in regards to dogs, just some people decided to select for dumb as shit characteristics

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 10 Dec 2020 16:05:31 No.12448178 Report

Quoted By:

>>12444353
Not fuck everybody so there won't be accident kids.

Choose the best mate to mate with, and viola, eugenics.

We don't have to measure intracranial volume to produce healthy and effective offspring.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 10 Dec 2020 16:41:53 No.12448298 Report

Quoted By:

>>12444353
Yes
a long running study on an inbreeding closed hereford cattle breeding herd the Line 1 Hereford at the animal research centre Fort Keogh Montana
https://academic.oup.com/jas/article-abstract/70/3/723/4705808?redirectedFrom=fulltext

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 10 Dec 2020 16:43:37 No.12448301 Report

Quoted By:

>>12446258
yet a man with one copy of the cystic fibrosis gene is statistically much less likely to die from tuberculosis infection
it's a heterosis advantage gene

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 10 Dec 2020 16:57:24 No.12448336 Report

Quoted By: >>12448339

>>12444353
I would define eugenics as an intervention (by means other than natural, kin, or sexual selection) with the purpose of binging about a genetic change at the population level such that the prevalence of undesirable traits decreases, or the prevalence of desirable traits increases. Note that ‘undesirable’ and ‘desirable’ are inherently ideologically defined, since we are talking about selection that does not involve typical evolutionary selection mechanisms. An example of this is selective breeding of livestock to increase milk yield.

In humans, as opposed to narrowly circumscribed populations of livestock / pets, this would not practically work for several reasons.

Humans are exposed to very different environments across individuals, so most of trait variation is not due to genetic factors but to differences in environment. One consequence is that it makes it hard to identify subjects who have desirable genetic characteristics, especially when considering polygenic traits that people would tend to think are desirable based on ideological reasons.

It is possible to measure genetic potential directly from genetic markers and what we know from this is that these genetic predictors perform poorly. We can also tell that there are many important, very rare genetic variants relevant for phenotype which we will never be able to identify. We thus have an absolute ceiling on our ability to assess an individual’s genetic fitness from either their current performance or from their genome and we know that the potential ability to do this is extremely low, far too low to be useful for selective breeding.

(comment too long)

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 10 Dec 2020 16:58:41 No.12448339 Report

Quoted By: >>12448341

>>12448336
Animals are bred in controlled environments and have short generational times with large numbers of offspring. In these circumstances selective breeding can produce desired changes in a small number of specific traits. Humans on the other hand have relatively long generational times, low numbers of offspring, and massive genetic flow between populations (low rates of inbreeding). Selective breeding in humans would thus be extremely slow compared to other species.

Removal of undesirable traits assumes that: a) these traits arise directly from the genome b) that genetic variants responsible for those traits are present in the population and will disappear upon removal. Both assumptions are wrong because a) phenotype is a product of both genome and environment, b) many traits that are detrimental to fitness arise because of de-novo mutations that cannot be selected out, and c) recessive genes cannot be selected out when considering phenotype alone.

These are only some of the reasons that came to mind, but there are many more. Regarding its potential: selective breeding of humans in a tightly circumscribed population, besides being decidedly unethical (in my opinion), impractical to the point of impossible (for above reasons), will always come with deleterious and unintended trait selection. Yes we can select for traits in animals, but the species where we have done so are typically quite unhealthy too (dogs that look cute can’t breathe well; cows that produce a lot of milk develop chronic joint problems and produce milk with low protein content, etc). So its potential for trait selection is limited, and its potential to damage the scientific community as well as the population is vast.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 10 Dec 2020 16:59:43 No.12448341 Report

Quoted By: >>12448417

>>12448339
>We can also tell that there are many important, very rare genetic variants relevant for phenotype which we will never be able to identify
and to elaborate on this: In polygenic traits, the genome can account for a large portion of trait variance, yet paradoxically GWAS only identifies genes that account for a proportion low trait variance individually. This tells us that there must exist genes that account for a disproportionate amount of trait variance but do so through combinatorial means that study of the genome is unable to bring to light when considering genes as isolated functional entities. What's more, even if this view changes and new tools arise that allow us to chart these currently obfuscated combinatorial mechanisms, it will be impossible to chart all relevant combinations because the search space is larger than what occurs in the population and rare variants will still be overshadowed by trait variance that is due to environmental variance.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 10 Dec 2020 17:15:46 No.12448396 Report

Quoted By: >>12448411

>>12444353
No. Look at 4chan. It's full of genetic dead-ends who are wanting kids. The only way to achieve proper eugenics would be to cull all the trash, but there would inevitably be a resistance that would prevent any eugenics.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 10 Dec 2020 17:19:16 No.12448411 Report

Quoted By:

>>12448396
>The only way to achieve proper eugenics would be to cull all the trash
>Look at 4chan. It's full of genetic dead-ends
why isnt 4chan eugenics then?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 10 Dec 2020 17:19:58 No.12448417 Report

Quoted By: >>12448436

>>12448341
yet we do still have differential reproductive rates, the most educated women are having almost no children while the least often have a multitude, how can this not have severe effects?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 10 Dec 2020 17:23:48 No.12448436 Report

Quoted By: >>12448505

>>12448417
'Education', is an acquired trait, so not an example of something that you could select for to begin with.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 10 Dec 2020 17:41:22 No.12448505 Report

Quoted By: >>12448536

>>12448436
there's an educatability polygenic score, if those females with a higher polygenic score are producing fewwer offspring then the next generation will have a lower polygenic score for educatability

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 10 Dec 2020 17:45:43 No.12448524 Report

Quoted By: >>12448555

>>12444732
just look at how we changed the average american over the last 200 years, to become more plyable obedient voters for the nations elites.

the world has fully active eugenics program. and that is to select for the lowest standard of human to reproduce the most.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 10 Dec 2020 17:47:27 No.12448536 Report

Quoted By: >>12448543

>>12448505
>polygenic score
You're using this as synonymous with fitness, but it isn't necessarily. It'd be inversely proportional to fitness in your example. On top of that, you're making the prediction that the population is expected to become less educated over time. But that's in direct conflict with what can be observed in developed nations.

Aside from all of that, nothing we're discussing here argues against anything I've said. I'm not arguing that natural, kin, and sexual selection aren't taking place. They are. That's orthogonal to the argument I've brought here, however.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 10 Dec 2020 17:48:40 No.12448543 Report

Quoted By: >>12448560

>>12448536
>But that's in direct conflict with what can be observed in developed nations.
Are you completely disconnected from reality?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 10 Dec 2020 17:50:53 No.12448555 Report

Quoted By:

>>12448524
Yeah, it's like people don't realise eugenics never really went away, but those that are in control of it don't have such philanthropic goals

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 10 Dec 2020 17:51:55 No.12448560 Report

Quoted By: >>12448567

>>12448543
No. Are you?

https://ourworldindata.org/global-education

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 10 Dec 2020 17:53:51 No.12448567 Report

Quoted By: >>12448598

>>12448560
so what if the barrier to entry has greatly reducd through technology, this does not change the genetic trend

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 10 Dec 2020 17:59:19 No.12448598 Report

Quoted By: >>12448657

>>12448567
It's like I'm arguing with a demented person. Are you entirely unable to follow an argument or just not interested in a normal discussion?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 10 Dec 2020 18:00:18 No.12448604 Report

Quoted By: >>12448632 >>12448671

>>12444353
> does eugenics work?
The problem is that the people running the eugenics program always pick some stupid bullshit for their selection.

Look at Germany in the 1940s. You are saying that your imaginary Sky Father DIDN'T knock up a virgin girl in ancient Palestine? Well, I'm afraid you have to die for that belief.

Or Serbia, 1990's. Oh, your great great great great grandfather lived on that hill instead of this one? Well, you can't be worthy of life then.

Or Ruwanda, 1994. Your skin is a few shades lighter than mine? Well, we can't have that, now can we?

Eugenics based on IQ is idiocy. IQ, even if it can be proven to be genetic, is NO measure of success. Trust me, Bezos is no genius. He didn't invent the Internet. He didn't invent sales. He did combine the two, and stick with it. It's not his IQ that's made him the richest man on Earth. It's his stubborn belief that he had a good idea.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 10 Dec 2020 18:05:15 No.12448632 Report

Quoted By: >>12448742

>>12448604
Low IQ post. You should be sterilized.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 10 Dec 2020 18:09:36 No.12448657 Report

Quoted By: >>12448687

>>12448598
I could ask the same question, how familiar are you with the Flynn effect or what has arisen more recently and been dubbed either the reverse Flynn effect or the Woodley effect?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 10 Dec 2020 18:11:21 No.12448671 Report

Quoted By: >>12448742

>>12448604
You are a retard with only a scant understanding of conflicts.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 10 Dec 2020 18:12:34 No.12448680 Report

Quoted By: >>12448852

>>12444353
Of course it works, how do you think plant and animal domestication works? Selectively breeding for certain chosen traits.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 10 Dec 2020 18:13:41 No.12448687 Report

Quoted By: >>12448792

>>12448657
>yet another besides-the-point
not interested, all you're doing is demonstrating that you didn't understand a single one of the multitude of points I've made, so I'm not going to waste more of my time on you

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 10 Dec 2020 18:26:33 No.12448742 Report

Quoted By:

>>12448632
>>12448671
> You disagree with me. I can't debate you, so you should be sterilized.
This is why eugenics won't work. Thank you for proving my point.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 10 Dec 2020 18:36:08 No.12448792 Report

Quoted By: >>12449284

>>12448687
How does the Fynn effect not get to the very heart of your statement?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 10 Dec 2020 18:45:33 No.12448852 Report

Quoted By: >>12448860

>>12448680
> Selectively breeding for certain chosen traits.
A stalk of corn or a domestic cat isn't likely to unload a clip of 7.62 in your face when you try to cut its balls off.

Take Somalia. The nation had and still has no working government. Just a bunch of warlords. Yet, a multinational coalition with modern day military logistics, satellite recon and some of the best technology available at the time got their asses kicked by a bunch of starving peons with 40-year old surplus Russian AKs.

Why? It wasn't IQ, or the superiority of this gene vs that gene. No, it was motivation. The coalition was doing a job. The peons were fighting for their lives. Motivation trumps some bullshit score on a test every time.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 10 Dec 2020 18:46:36 No.12448860 Report

Quoted By:

>>12448852
okay naruto

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 10 Dec 2020 20:13:50 No.12449284 Report

Quoted By:

>>12448792
Because it is the result of environmental changes, and has nothing to do with intentional selection of traits. This should be stating the obvious if you had read the very first sentence of my first post in this thread.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 10 Dec 2020 20:30:49 No.12449351 Report

Quoted By:

>>12444353
it works

https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2020/02/20/discovery-institute-makes-hay-of-dawkins-tweet-and-a-geneticist-mistakenly-says-that-artificial-selection-wont-work-in-humans/

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 10 Dec 2020 23:54:30 No.12450386 Report

Quoted By:

>>12444353
it works for other organisms

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 11 Dec 2020 00:05:06 No.12450437 Report

Quoted By:

Religions are the only way I can see to have a practical and large scale moral eugenic system that people accept.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 11 Dec 2020 00:47:35 No.12450641 Report

Quoted By:

class systems in various societies around the world practice eugenics through partner selection for thier off-spring, selecting for traits that would benefit the lineage of thier families.
in england, and perhaps other european universities, the selection system for admiting women in oxford/cambridge, or into specific finishing schools, provides a selection of women which certain families sons only select thier wives from.
you dont need a direct specific program of "eugenics" you just have to select for social groups, men and women in the same social group automatically has the desired result.

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

Your latest searches