Is acceptance of the weak bad for the future of the humanity
- Locked due to inactivity on Aug 4, '16 4:32pm
Thread Topic: Is acceptance of the weak bad for the future of the humanity
-
So in a purely capitalist world (no laws on what can be done, no welfare, no healthcare etc) only the strongest would be at the top and be able to support offspring, this is how humans evolved to how they are today.
Now that society is becoming more and more socialist it's less survival of the fittest and more survival of everyone except complete retards.
Now I am thinking in the mega long term (with careful thought humans could be so much more advanced in 1000 years).
My proposed solution: Regulated breeding.
People must have breeding licenses, if the couple does not both have one then the baby is put into a government system to raise children. Abortion is encouraged (and government paid for) in these cases.
Another license is the license to raise children. If the parents don't both have one of these as well it goes into a government to raise children.
The government system is that the smartest kids go to the smartest adopters in a goal to match children with an adult with reasonably close intelligence. All adopters need child raising license.
To get a breeding license you need to be in the top X% of adults (where X 100/Y where Y is the rate of increase in human population per average human lifespan, this formula may need tweaking depending on rises or falls wanted in population). This measurement of how skilled you are should cover mental and physical aspects and have an exponential system so extremely smart people can be lacking in physical attributes and vice versa.
With this system both overpopulation could be eliminated and humans would be even better than before.
While this system is undoubtedly flawed do you think something like this should be applied?
Discuss. -
Well, you're misunderstanding both evolution, and the nature of Civilization. See, capatolism in what is considered to be its pure form is not the state of anarchy. We are not necessarily required to fend for ourselves in every physical respect. Civilization in fact, is there for us to use one anoher as stepping stools when it comes right down to it.
Its important to note that strength is relative, diversity is key, and artificial pressure is pointless.
aside from these points, its really not as if civilization removes from survival of the fittest from the eqaution. -
I've had this idea before although I hadn't thought it through as precisely as that. I have those thoughts when you see two really dumb people with a baby - the kind who could be on the Jeremy Klye show, I think how can they be allowed to have a baby, which I know is bad.
I agree, nowadays we do everything we can to keep everyone alive - the sickest and the weakest which makes me think are these kinds of charities and medicine etc actually a good thing.
If it happened even in 1000 years I'm not sure it would work - there could be a useful gene found in someone who wasn't very smart that wouldn't get passed down.
You should probably post that on another site (as well as a forum mainly of teens) for a better discussion. -
Also then we'd have a world full of geeks which we wouldn't want
-
What you are describing is known as eugenics. I personally believe that any government intrusion into reproductive freedom is very dangerous precedent to set and is a massive assault on individual liberty. And it should probably come as no surprise that the Nazis, in their striving to create a master race, instituted their own aggressive eugenics policy. Also scientific and medical advancements enable humanity to find cures to genetic diseases, ultimately aiding our evolution.
Nothing about this is a good idea. Just the archaic primitive tendencies of our inner ape run amok. -
Yeah. And I mean can you imagine if it happened, people wouldn't agree with it and just let it happen.
-
I think that the weak ones have certain qualities that the strong people don't realize. That is how some people treat others today. Just because you think the strong should be at the top doesn't necessarily mean it's the best.
-
That is also true
This thread is locked, therefore no new posts can be made.
