You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Eugine_Nier comments on Equality and natalism - Less Wrong Discussion

10 [deleted] 24 October 2012 03:53PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (105)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 24 October 2012 11:20:27PM *  6 points [-]

You don't really need to understand genetics very well to do eugenics see animal husbandry and except for certain dog breeds the unintended consequences of have proven to pretty manageable in animals (except in some breeds where targeting a certain appearance rather than temperament, physical ability or intelligence is the primary goal).

The difference is that with animal breeding you have a clear distinction between the people doing the breeding and the animals being bred. Humans breeding humans any attempt at being "scientific" is likely to collapse in the face of the resulting signaling games.

I mean look at the current state of social science, do you think it would somehow magically improve if eugenics were to be embraced? In fact, it's likely to get worse since the results of social science would then have even more significance.