= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
CAE_Jones comments on Some thoughts on having children - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (106)
I've updated away from "No; in the unlikely event that I decide I want kids at some point in the future, there are plenty of kids that need adopting" toward "It's probably a good idea, if my DNA turns out to be sufficiently awesome (measurement pending)" over the past year or so, which I believe is due largely to things I've read at LessWrong and LWSphere blogs. In particular, the idea of heritable intelligence being negatively correlated with number of offspring finally started to concern me enough that I started treating it as a problem to be solved.
But I am in no position to be planning for that sort of thing, for a number of reasons that I whine about too much as it is. So my efforts will be directed toward changing those reasons, ad victorium.
If you're smart and healthy (bad vision notwithstanding), donate sperm. Free kids! Raised by someone who actively sought to have kids!
Thanks I needed that with my afternoon coffee. Now to clean this keyboard and table. 'Free kids!' begs the question for me how many economists donate swimmers.
There are widespread claims floating around the pop-sci-o-sphere that intelligence is disproportionately inherited from the mother (see, e.g. here ), which would suggest the important thing is getting smart women to donate eggs, much more than getting smart men to donate sperm.
Although, I see that when this topic was briefly raised at the skeptics stackexchange, the evidence appeared to be lacking.
Apparently there's a lot less demand for eggs than sperm. I don't know why.