Sensitive Matter

[washu_chan_uk]

This is a fore-warning now, this post will offend someone somewhere, I warn you because my intentions are not to offend but to provoke thought on the subject

Comments

[giro_batol]

That isn't too far away from what the Nazi's thought.

Kuma thinks that being gay is evolutions way of controlling population.

I think that not giving pregnant teenagers free housing may reduce trailer trash :)

[washu_chan_uk]

See my thoughts arent to commit genocide its pondering if this is going to caused us issues in the future. I've had the same thoughts that perhaps homosexuality is a genetic failsafe in DNA to help control populations and perhaps keep certain genetic errors out, think of it as a DNA Anti-Virus or Registry repair.

[giro_batol]

No i'm not calling you a Nazi, it is just when you start this type of train of thought that is where it ends. As someone with a incurable medical condition if it wasn't for medicine i probably wouldn't be here anymore.

One early thought of mine about the future being run by chavs was to do an IQ test on everyone and then neuter all those that failed. I was told that may thinking was not far from Nazism, and i did wonder who would clean the toilets*.

* Not that i'm being anti-people who clean toilets, the bloke who does this at work is a very intelligent businessman.

[washu_chan_uk]

Thoughts themselves are not dangerous, it's the implimentation of those thoughts that is when the danger occurs. You wont find me out purifying the world with fire one chav at a time any time soon, I just wonder if we are marching ourselves towards something terrible with the interceptions we make in medicine.

[elfasi]

It makes sense. Species evolve and generally improve, through survival of the fittest. There's a decent case to be made that humanity has stopped evolving, completely. Resources and space are finite, and unless we expand exponentially into the space beyond our planet, things will eventually hit a crunch time. Trouble is, trying to argue for checking that growth, for improving who we are as a species, is about as popular as disagreeing with the line 'Isn't it all worth it, if just one child is saved?'. One thing I would say, I think there is a line to be drawn between medical help which saves us from external pathogens, and medical help which helps us survive genetic disabilities. Though even that line gets blurred, the human genome contains the DNA from numerous past pathogens which we've developed immunity to...

[washu_chan_uk]

One could argue that those developed immunities are evolution in action, learning to fight off a pathogen thats attacking us.

[elfasi]

Oh certainly. Though the bubonic plague reduced the human population by a devastating amount, and those who survived it required things actually beyond immune system improvements to survive it. So sometimes, or maybe often, we get a random mutation that lets us survive. No hard work, just luck. But then that's pretty much evolution all over. Guess the luck's all gone from our equation now.

[branded_bunni]

I think Stephen Hawking somes up my main counter-argument against this. Just because someone is physically disabled does not mean they cannot make major contributions to society.

Evolution is a neutral arbiter in this; we have developed technology and medication to overcome physical limitations - maybe that's just another stage.

Bun x

[washu_chan_uk]

I can certainly agree with that, medicine/technology can certainly be a tool we've developed because our brains have evolved that we understand how to stop these things. But on the alternative coin that evolution of intelligence could well be our downfall as well.

Just my little brain knocking at thoughts bigger than I should be allowed near I guess.

[rasetsugalford]

A thought is a wonder to behold. A dream can be another persons' nightmare if turned to reality.

[spargue]

I disagree with bunni's use of an individual case for a counter argument. You can pull out but what about people all day. The main way of measuring it is statistics and modelling. The main confusion seems to be from bad mutation accumulation. The idea that bad mutations accumulate and propagate through the genome. The main defence we have against this is sex. 50% of your DNA is kept in the new generation; thus negative mutations don't accumulate

Hear, hear!

[aydin_e]

I've been saying more or less the same thing for ages, although I personally believe medicine and excessive hygiene will kill us off anyway. Once something nasty evolves to be completely resistant to all drugs and our immune systems have been reduced to nothing by the constant drive to clean and sanitize, we'll pay the price for our "progress".

There are many people who simply should not be alive and are a drain on society and/or public funds as a direct result, such as those who suffer such severe brain damage as to never recover, or perhaps for those in comas, never to even regain consciousness. These people simply should not be kept alive, it's not logical at all.

The same goes for saving people who try to commit suicide: it shouldn't be done. If you wanted to end your own life and you failed, tough shit, not gonna fix you now.

Between this and voluntary euthanasia, we might save ourselves yet.

[steve_optimist]

This'll be a long reply, but I figured it was worth it to respond to the several points of philosophy I see pervading your argument here

[washu_chan_uk]

Thank you Leighton for the input you've made, I really do value hearing from you on such matters