Quote:
Quote by: springscout  Consider: eugenics is the elimination of the weaker traits which is, in essence, artificially assisted natural selection.
The only real reason why the previous eugenics movement was incorrect was because of the unscientific, racially-motivated basis--this also cast a bad light on eugenics.
The reason why we can't attempt it now is because we would be hard-pressed to link genes with physical and mental abilities.
But from a logical perspective, there is absolutely nothing wrong with eugenics. Of course, it is ethically dubious. But nobody can doubt its efficiency.
In any case, I'm young, naive, and stupid. Would someone care to enlighten me? |
Eugenics is self directed evolution. It is an ethical practice.
"We have been God-like in our planned breeding of our domesticated plants and animals, but we have been rabbit-like in our unplanned breeding of ourselves." ~ Arnold Toynbee
A man having several sisters with breast cancer and a woman in the same circumstance are cautious in their planning of their progeny. Both are carriers of the errant version of the BRCA1 gene. There is a 1 in 4 chance their offspring will inherit both halves, a 1 in 4 chance their offspring will be carrier free, and a 1 in 2 chance their offspring will be carriers.
They use drugs and she releases many eggs which are flushed out and fertilized in a lab. The fertile eggs developed into 8 cell blastocystes at which time a single cell was taken from each and tested for the presence of the rogue version of the BRCA1 gene. 4 were discovered to be carrier and disease free. 1 was implanted in the woman's uterus, 3 were frozen, and the rest discarded. A girl was born that was free of the errant breast cancer gene.
That is an example of self directed evolution.
BBC NEWS | Health | Breast cancer gene-free baby born
Eugenics is a loaded subject. Perhaps some guidelines.
Genome Biology | Full text | The ethics of characterizing difference: guiding principles on using racial categories in human genetics