Slippery Slope of Eugenics

Sir Francis Galton was a cousin of Charles Darwin and a supporter of eugenics. He believed that society, by protecting the weak, was hindering the process of natural selection and, as a result, hindering the progress of the human race. He believed eugenics was the remedy. This is what Galton had to say about eugenics:

I propose to show in this book that a man's natural abilities are derived by inheritance, under exactly the same limitations as are the form and physical features of the whole organic world. Consequently, as it is easy, notwithstanding those limitations, to obtain by careful selection a permanent breed of dogs or horses gifted with peculiar powers of running, or of doing anything else, so it would be quite practicable to produce a highly-gifted race of men by judicious marriages during several consecutive generations.

If you have read my previous posts, then it is quite obvious what I believe about eugenics. I mean, does it bother anyone else that humans are compared to dogs and horses? Suppose that humans are animals and nothing more. Then free will is an illusion and you never really chose to read this blog. Morality is an illusion and Hitler wasn't necessarily "wrong" because wrong doesn't exist. In fact the only thing that can be said about Hitler's actions is that they were harmful. And since there are no Shoulds and Oughts then humans can act however they want. Why should I care about the human race. I am temporary and so is the human race. So forget eugenics, I will take care of myself. And I won't be "wrong" in doing so.
I believe that we have free will and I believe that morality exists. So there must be something else about humans. We are more than some long string of genetic code, don't you think?
Back to eugenics. Who would be doing the selecting? What criterion would be used to determine if I am eligible to make babies? It seems like a slippery slope. At the start only major genetic defects are targeted for elimination from the gene pool by the eugenics program. Then less severe defects like ADHD and scoliosis. Then things like learning disabilities are targeted... Then things like albinism. Then fair skin in general. Then light colored hair. Then curly hair. Then left-handedness. Then ...

Super Natural Selection

I dont know if that is such a thing or if it is refered to as something else but it seems to me that when we select mates based on anything but raw desire or when we choose to abort children, that we engage in something beyond "natural selection" or as the title sugests, supernatural selection. Of course to say this is to say that there is something about human intelligence that is not natural (another blog post all together). I write this to direct your attention to an article that I caught in Slate that sort of describes the decay of our taboo in dealing with abortion for the sake of gender selection. I have to admit, there are some examples in which I would agree that "gender selection" is appropriate. What do you think?

No Money, Mo Problems

A post to make up for that one I missed (oops):

Recently, thoughts of We crept into my head as the next diversion to keep me from getting a full night's sleep as seems to be routine these days. And, something struck me. I could not and still cannot recall an instant in We where there was any mention of money or currency. The only related icident I could remember was D-503 talking about how they were all given special unifs for the Day of Unanimitiy holiday/celebration/election, whatever you wish to call it. But again, he said they were all given the unifs, nothing about having to purchase them. Also, they all seem to live in identical buildings with identicle rooms, all made of glass. So, as we have all noted, it is the ideal realization of socialism, and the only motivating factor is to work for the benefit of the One State and the overall happiness of the population.

As far as Vas, there seems to be currency involved, but it makes me wonder about the nature of the classes, if they exist, in Flatland. Are vasectomies available to everyone, or only the middle and upper class, and are the lower classes even concerned with eugenics or simply survival?

Ok, so maybe I'm not saying anything groundbreaking or even remotely interesting for anyone, but to me it is a big realization because the whole time I was reading the book, I felt like it was a possible future for mankind, even if only slightly. But now, I realize that the One State is nearly impossible. I do not think there will ever be a society that operates without currency. Unfortunate in ways, but also fortunate as is the nature of the beast. I can only imagine how bad apathy and laziness would be if there were no money, but at the same time it would enable many people to do so many things they could not have previously if executed properly. Of course, all of this is incredibly hypothetical and when you throw human nature into the caldron, it will never work. And, as always, Socialism looks great on paper, so let's just leave it at that.

Interesting + Bizarre = VAS

From wikipedia.org, Mensa's mission is to:
1. "to identify and foster human intelligence for the benefit of humanity;"
2. "to encourage research into the nature, characteristics, and uses of intelligence;"
3. "and to provide a stimulating intellectual and social environment for its members."

After reading what Mensa is about, I grew to have a positive attitude towards this organization. It supports people who have high IQ's. It's a society which would have similar ideals to magnet schools, gifted student programs, and the like. And those institutions are very normal and a part of American and European society. They're for the smart kids...

The book, VAS, points out something criminal about Mensa members. British Mensa members, being so intelligent, are asked how to improve society (129). In 1962, 47% of them say it's a good idea to kill "sufficiently unhealthy or subnormal infants"(130). Further, in 1994, Mensa members want to get rid of "homeless, retarded and elderly" (130). How absurd is that?

So now I'm confused. If people this intelligent can think such evil things, where is society headed? I'm coming to really dislike this idea of eugenics because it says if you're not one of the smart ones you should be "dead" (sterilized).

How do Square and Circle fit in? Is he stupid and insignificant in society, as seen by Circle? Or is it another matter altogether?

Wrapped Up in Plastic... Surgery

Angolina Jolie's lips or Katy Holmes' nose? Brad Pitt's cheeks or Justin Timberlake's eyebrows? Tough decisions like these are made all of the time in waiting rooms of plastic surgeons. We keep seeing more and more people that have the desire to get plastic surgery. Shows like "Doctor 90210" and "Nip Tuck" are becoming increasingly popular.
Don't all of these modifications to the body seem so pointless, when in the long run the boobs will eventually sag, the chin will eventually wrinkle, and the body will eventually die?
In VAS, eugenics is a recurring theme. It is the idea that improving the gene pool will improve the future for the human race. Less genetic defects, less undesirable traits, less inherited health issues.
Like plastic surgery, eugenics looks to alter what nature has put forth. It is about making modifications to a body. In the case of eugenics, the body is the human race as a whole.
Similar to the way the human body dies, the human race will eventually die off. And like plastic surgery, eugenics seems pointless.
Besides, to be perfect seems unhuman. Who wants to live in a world of Barbies and Kens. Everything "perfect", everything unoriginal, everything engineered, everything wrapped in plastic.
Many times, the most enjoyable things in life are the unexpected and imperfect things. Like a cool rain in the summer.

writing and "reading"

Discussions in class this week were not really what I would consider to be "blog generating". I'm just about ready to never talk about, think about, or look at the book We ever again. Unfortunately, I still have this weekend to pour over it once more. I really am looking forward to writing about Vas though. I've never done a close reading analysis paper before and Vas seems like the perfect candidate for a first run. I really enjoy this book... but that's not an original thought. I was trying to think of the modern day equivalent to the eugenics craze of the past. I know that anthropology and genetics are the "tools" of eugenics, but they somehow seem far less sinister. This then got me thinking about what it is about the last 40 years that have reversed the trend of eugenics in western civilization. Was it the reaction to the holocaust? Was it the liberal revolution of the 60's and 70's? Or is it just a byproduct of our current mini-enlightenment called the information age. Is it possible that homogeny has transcended race and class and that we are all judged more by our intellect than from where we come? Is it possible that this blog post is just really boring?