Reality Boxes

Acknowledgement of a conservation law is typically a reliable indication of realistic analysis. There’s a notable example here (embedded in an important article):

In the past, individuals could suffer death or disability due to small genetic defects, for example in their immune systems, for which modern medicine now routinely substitutes and which welfare cushions. But even modern medicine and welfare have their limits. W.D. Hamilton stated that when the misery resulting from mutations grows too great to bear — for medical, economic or humanitarian reasons — the load will be reduced, either naturally or artificially — painfully through elevated rates of mortality, or painlessly through eugenics.
[My emphasis]

The slogan It’s going to happen one way or the other is engraved upon the gateway to the Temple of Gnon.

May 13, 2015admin 23 Comments »
FILED UNDER :Realism

TAGGED WITH : , , ,

23 Responses to this entry

  • Reality Boxes | Neoreactive Says:

    […] Reality Boxes […]

    Posted on May 13th, 2015 at 5:40 am Reply | Quote
  • Dark Psy-Ops Says:

    Yeah I’m not sure I’m going to make it…

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 13th, 2015 at 9:11 am Reply | Quote
  • Reality Boxes | Reaction Times Says:

    […] Source: Outside In […]

    Posted on May 13th, 2015 at 9:14 am Reply | Quote
  • Exfernal Says:

    Eugenics is such a loaded word, unfortunately….

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 13th, 2015 at 11:57 am Reply | Quote
  • Different T Says:

    “W.D. Hamilton stated that when the misery resulting from mutations grows too great to bear — for medical, economic or humanitarian reasons — the load will be reduced”

    “Eugenics is such a loaded word, unfortunately….”

    “Do you think this will reverse “dysgenic” trends? I think it will accelerate and (once the technology catches up and the people are desperate enough) perfect and idealize these “dysgenic” trends.”

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 13th, 2015 at 12:14 pm Reply | Quote
  • NRx_N00B Says:

    overshoot is a bitch.

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 13th, 2015 at 1:37 pm Reply | Quote
  • peter connor Says:

    I think there is a dangerous delusion embodied here, to wit, that we will actually understand the hyper complex world of genes and cellular biology well enough to make gene editing a reliable process, with no nasty side effects like extermination of the race through Mouse Utopia or some such….

    [Reply]

    Different T Reply:

    Admin certainly has a more optimistic view of things (including that these things will “increase the ratchet,” even if he claims it will be calamitous[hence the optimism]).

    It would be interesting to know how much of that perspective is due to him being in Asia.

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 13th, 2015 at 4:05 pm Reply | Quote
  • E. Antony Gray (@RiverC) Says:

    “the poor you will have always with you” was not the statement of a mere man.

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 13th, 2015 at 7:44 pm Reply | Quote
  • Michael Says:

    “Positive eugenics is nonetheless proposed by some of the most influential contemporary advocates for gene improvement. Julian Savulescu, professor of bioethics at Oxford University, argues that parents should be free to choose embryos that will not only give the children the best possible health but the most fulfilling life. It is morally wrong, he thinks, to limit reproductive choices. He explicitly approves positive eugenics, maintaining that parents should choose the “best children”.[51] Savulescu and his doctoral supervisor Peter Singer do not perceive the danger of a eugenic caste because, like many mainstream sociologists, they deny biological influences on class differences”
    this is what i find inconceivable can the rulers of the world with their NSAs and Rand corps their research h facilities really not understand high school biology mathematics and logic I know Catholic school rocked but im a construction worker with an eighth grade education and have been talking about these things for decades. it seems impossible.
    but then no matter how far down the rabbit hole of conspiracy theory you might be willing to go for arguments sake ,there is no plausible explanation for their policies other than suicidal madness. so high IQ stupidity it must be.Odd

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 13th, 2015 at 8:33 pm Reply | Quote
  • Michael Says:

    Now this might be a feature rather than a bug, a sort of elite birth control, you can only get pregnant within you class no matter how much sport sex you have with the apemen
    certainly the lads should like this miscegenation proofing

    “In the 21st century, there is a real possibility of creating biological castes, with real biological differences between rich and poor … The end result could be speciation.” (Speciation occurs when populations become so different that they can no longer breed together to produce fertile offspring.) Class differences will become exaggerated, Harari argues, because the rich will always have first access to the latest genetic or mechanical enhancements

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 13th, 2015 at 8:38 pm Reply | Quote
  • peter connor Says:

    Of course, since many “species” are now known to breed and produce hybrids, the question of speciation is far from clear….it would probably take tens of thousands of years to approach the point where interbreeding was not possible.

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 13th, 2015 at 8:49 pm Reply | Quote
  • Michael Says:

    Hmm so the patriarchal arrangement of marriages would return. children will once again be well bred to insure they are well bred. fortunes will become so vast and labor so cheap saying like all men are created equal will seem quaint,
    A eugenic elite would marry in. It would, in effect, reproduce strictly within its class, either by choosing mates who were also the result of eugenics or by using embryo selection. As Herrnstein and Murray showed in The Bell Curve, the effect of assortative marriage alone, without eugenic selection, can be significant when it involves heritable characteristics such as height and IQ. The anthropologist Henry Harpending recently modelled the Herrnstein–Murray scenario, showing that assortment can have a dramatic effect in just one generation. The model shows that heritable group averages diverge
    when a minority class constituting the top 10 per cent of the population assorts (marries others who share a characteristic). The model predicts an average IQ difference of 30 points, sufficient to allow the eugenic class to dominate the professions and practise long-term dynastic strategies of wealth accumulation and influence.[63]

    The result would be wealth and status almost set in concrete, an inflexibility likely to result in social conflict because class lines would harden as the rich got ever richer. Dynasties would no longer spontaneously dissolve but persist down the generations unless their reproductive strategy was curtailed by government edict or revolution. Because the dynasties would depend on careful breeding, there would be an extra payoff from choosing mates who shared the eugenic culture and inheritance. From the perspective of democratic values, exclusive elite eugenics would be especially objectionable because it would add the insult of actual superiority to the injury of aristocratic privilege. Such an elite would have a vital interest in suppressing democracy to avoid redistributive policies. Their efforts to do so would be aided by their feelings of alienation from the masses with which they would have little social contact. They would find it adaptive to view the majority coldly, instrumentally and defensively.

    [Reply]

    Lesser Bull Reply:

    Depends on if the elite and their awesome genes can breed with the commoners. If so, over a few centuries, the hereditary distance between the elites and the commoners would shrink.

    [Reply]

    Different T Reply:

    Hmm so the patriarchal arrangement of marriages would return.

    Seems the concept of “marriage” would be vanquished. Not sure you understand how the “eugenic” arms race would be run. Germline editing means editing the actual genome, not choosing the best zygote; certainly not choosing the best zygote from Husband and Wife couplings.

    [Reply]

    Michael Reply:

    maybe but not because of germ line editing which is done to sperm cells, egg cells ,or even embryos.while i suppose eventually this might lead to couples or singles picking out a model they like, i would bet most couples would want their own child supersized. particularly those with better genes to start with. I also think elites will keep marriage and family . the nurture assumption assertions aside family still has advantages. elites transfer more than just genetics to their offspring.
    blacks on the other hand will probably get whiter and whiter . the first person to offer straight hair to africans will be the worlds first trillion air trust be i live in Brooklyn part year.Asians will get whiter too everyone will because we are the beauty standard see plastic surgery trends world wide
    homosexuals if indeed genetic will go extinct overnight.
    will men still want to marry uptight college bitches if they can just tweak Elizas genes,or will uptight college bitches become more womanly. i would guess sexual dimorphism will increase.
    how far will we go into animal DNA will be interesting and what sort of things can be done with synthetic sequences is that a concept yet hmm

    [Reply]

    Different T Reply:

    i would bet most couples would want their own child supersized.

    That’s not how an arms race works. What they want (especially, were they want it stop [ie, the couple can still claim a semblance of relation to the child]) doesn’t matter.

    while i suppose eventually this might lead to couples or singles picking out a model they like and I also think elites will keep marriage and family . the nurture assumption assertions aside family still has advantages. elites transfer more than just genetics to their offspring.

    This whole line of thought is fucking with things far deeper than designer babies. If the parent has no real relation to the child, who does? Obvious answer is the state, less obvious is the corporation. Gives a whole new meaning to “Don’t tell me what to do, you’re not my dad!”

    homosexuals if indeed genetic will go extinct overnight.

    LOL.

    Different T Reply:

    Such an elite would have a vital interest in suppressing democracy to avoid redistributive policies.

    LOL. Unless a member of the “elite’s” business interests included ownership of the local Dollar Store, am I right?

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 13th, 2015 at 8:58 pm Reply | Quote
  • Michael Says:

    @peter connor
    unless you helped it along a bit to avois unwanted pregnancies say with apemen

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 13th, 2015 at 9:15 pm Reply | Quote
  • SVErshov Says:

    babies are comming and society is not ready. something telling me they going to set it on fire. seriously, think twice before getting one.

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 14th, 2015 at 4:42 pm Reply | Quote
  • Aeroguy Says:

    There’s different levels of eugenic technology. Genetic screening is the sort of thing that is simple, innocuous and done entirely with the parents own DNA. Not doing that to screen genetic diseases at the very least should be considered just as bad as binge drinking while pregnant.

    Next step up is modifying specific genes in screened zygotes or embryos, at the health sanitation level you could entirely eliminate debilitating genetic conditions from the gene pool in a single generation. Alternatively blue eyed babies becomes a option for someone who doesn’t have the recessive allele.

    From here more complex systems of genes can be engineered and optimized (assuming the parents are of good genetic stock this level of could be done entirely with screening but best results which will only grow ever more dramatic will depend on modification), intelligence boosting is at this level. Genetic tradeoffs start to become apparent as well, you’re not going to get an artistic superstar without also predisposing the kid to depression. The dark side of this is that under scrutiny the ends of the bell curve will actually get cut off in various places. Interesting people are sometimes interesting because of specific shortcomings which under specific circumstances may not even be shortcomings. While those of us here probably have a certain pride in our basedness, basedness such as ours is the part of the long end of the curve that some would cut out. But so long as competition endures, Gnon’s preferences will dominate eventually, not even genetic engineers can hide from his visage, rather wise ones will go out of their way to anticipate and serve his desires.

    Next comes chimeras, mixing in dna from other animals. While technically this can be done even with the simplest genetic modifications, I’m referring this level more to dramatic changes in chromosomes, even adding, subtracting, and replacing entire chromosomes. Changes can range from the subtle to the exotic. Humans might regain their sense of smell and animal uplift enters the picture. At this point children aren’t so much born as they’re engineered products to be sold.

    Finally you arrive at engineering life from scratch, entirely new phylums of life to be formed and filled out with multitudes of intelligent and super intelligent species. By the time this level of sophistication is reached calling it genetic engineering may even be a misnomer since the lines between biological and mechanical will be slurred into meaninglessness. Hierarchy and competition take on new meaning here. Species engineered for pleasure made extinct by species (or entire ecosystems) honed by the blind idiot god for survival and multiplication, just as it’s always been, but faster.

    The first prokaryotes, if transported through time to today would be beset on all sides by viruses, endless variety of modern prokaryotes, and eukaryotes. To say nothing of multicellular organisms. The first prokaryotes are long extinct, but they were hardly victims, rather the forebears of life itself, just as we are the forbears of intelligence.

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 15th, 2015 at 11:39 am Reply | Quote
  • Different T Says:

    just as we are the forbears of intelligence.

    Geocentric atheists say the darnedest things.

    [Reply]

    Exfernal Reply:

    Imago Dei? No comment….

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 15th, 2015 at 12:16 pm Reply | Quote

Leave a comment