Transfeminism / Transhumanism / 美学 Focus -- general thread

[bd648]

?

I'm going to avoid a multi-multi quote by just answering in order.

1. Generally my reason for disliking selective breeding is that genetic diversity is amazing, I dislike judging people based on genetics or most other factors, and the attempt to create an ubermensch that not everyone can become sort of disgusts me. Mostly that last one.


2. What I meant by detrimental in quotes in this instance is actually more in reference to people that are baseline average. It's a cold way of looking at things but i feel that if there is a substantial advantage to being genetically modified (in changing something to above the baseline (like genetic immunity or whatever) instead of changing something to reach the baseline(like removing a marker for arrhythmia)) and there has been something invested into making that change, AND there is an ethic of trying to create better offspring (which is what would probably even lead to applied genetic engineering in the first place), then those who are above the baseline would likely not want to have children with anybody who is below that baseline. I think of it as a sort of new way of marrying into money or power, except now you would be marrying into good genetics which i just don't like because of how it would quickly create a crazy disparity over the generations. To simplify, removing things detrimental to health; totally cool, advancing select groups of people indefinitely; not that cool.

3. Eh, if genetic modification actually helped everybody directly that sounds fine. Why not use both? (Mechanical augmentation just has more potential for unlimited growth (and is just super cool)).

[Unless]

That the genetically superior may pair off with each other in order to breed doesn't innately mean that the people that don't have this advantage won't still have children. I mean, to a limited extent one could argue that this form of selective breeding already exists in that attractive people pair up together for breeding and all that fun stuff, and so too do the less attractive ones.

I was then going to lead on into making some sort of comparison between that genetic modification and existing vaccines, but I'm quite tired and have been staring at the screen for a bit more than five minutes without succeeding in putting the sentence together in my head. So I guess I'll come back to this tomorrow depending on how drunk I get (my being single and Irish on Valentine's and all that Jaz).

[spoiler]
On an even less related note, I thought you might find it interesting to note that you just surpassed 1183 posts, which was the number of Geth programs running within the Legion platform in Mass Effect, and that's a robot and stuff which is sort of your thing. 1183 also used to be my old visa card number for this reason, before I had it stolen and got a new card with a different code.
[/spoiler]

[crackers]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gattaca

[basketweaver]

I think it's a little nonsensical to condemn genetic engineering for "unfairly discriminating" against hypothetical children who would have been born with less-than-superior genetics. Isn't the whole point that, since they will never be born in the first place, they won't be around to feel discriminated and to have their feelings hurt?

Isn't it more logical to think that genetic engineering can benefit absolutely everybody by giving everyone equal access to good genes? Brushing off the idea by saying, "oh, some forms of bad genetics are actually good" just seems like dodging the issue, since a good definition of "proper genetics" would just solve all of these problems.

I don't really think that things like asthma, psoriasis, and brittle bone syndrome are important things which must be maintained in our society. I do agree that mental genetic conditions, like autism and schizophrenia, do have arguable benefits though, and it would be harder to draw the line in the sand there (e.g., many genius inventors have some form of autism, and many great artists have a variety of mental conditions).

The only really shitty thing would be if genetic engineering had some sort of unforeseen effect on the mind, and we end up creating an entire generation of autistic, athletic, and remorseless psychopaths who destroy everything due to their scientific mental-genetic conditioning. God, that would be so ass lol.

[Unless]

I figure a big worry would be that a particular type of person and mindframe would be completely phased out despite not being innately disadvantageous in any way, but rather just unpopular at the time. A practical but unlikely example would be the complete eradication of being born with red hair, or the desire to play cricket.