Tweet
By accident I mean. Dosen't it shift the playing field away from R towards S?
-
Modern man calls walking more quickly in the same direction down the same road “change.”
The world, in the last three hundred years, has not changed except in that sense.
The simple suggestion of a true change scandalizes and terrifies modern man. -Nicolás Gómez Dávila -
Definitionally, eugenics can't happen by accident, so no.
That fact doesn't make it any smarter or less offensive as a policy, of course.I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891 -
I don't know what R and S are.
It probably is somewhat eugenic. Educated people wouldn't have more than one or two kids anyway, so the policy has the biggest effect on those who would, thus keeping the trend from becoming dysgenic.
One could also argue that if circumventing the policy takes money, and earning money in modern China is correlated with intelligence, then the effect is that smarter people have more kids than the rest.
Also, with the policy in place mistakes are costly. This favors smart people, because they (by definition) make fewer mistakes.Comment
-
Why do you think that the only policy that can solve the problems of this planet is offensive ?Originally posted by DanS View PostWith or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
Steven WeinbergComment
-
Since when do the ends justify the means?I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891Comment
-
Depend on wich means are used.With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
Steven WeinbergComment
-
Log-linear means.“As a lifelong member of the Columbia Business School community, I adhere to the principles of truth, integrity, and respect. I will not lie, cheat, steal, or tolerate those who do.”
"Capitalism ho!"Comment
-
Originally posted by DaShi View Post
With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
Steven WeinbergComment
-
-
+1Originally posted by Kuciwalker View PostModern man calls walking more quickly in the same direction down the same road “change.”
The world, in the last three hundred years, has not changed except in that sense.
The simple suggestion of a true change scandalizes and terrifies modern man. -Nicolás Gómez DávilaComment
-
Replication SurvivalOriginally posted by VetLegion View Post
You basically summed up my view of the thing, I'm just wondering if anyone can see any dysgenic trends that would offset this effect? I'm wondering how much does the average IQ of the new generations change compared to what it would otherwise be?
Also will eugenic policies make a comeback now that the west is in relative decline compared to the rest of the world? Or will the Chinese views on this change under western influence?Modern man calls walking more quickly in the same direction down the same road “change.”
The world, in the last three hundred years, has not changed except in that sense.
The simple suggestion of a true change scandalizes and terrifies modern man. -Nicolás Gómez DávilaComment
-
Yes, it's all part of a brilliant policy to ensure that they have too many men and not enough women.
Get real.Comment
-
A one child policy is nominally eugenic since it selects against genes present in those couples that would have been succesful in producing large numbers of living offspring and positively selects for genes present in couples that would tend to be less prolific. More importantly, a one child policy where females are selected against by culling, either in utero or after birth, is definitely eugenic.We need seperate human-only games for MP/PBEM that dont include the over-simplifications required to have a good AI
If any man be thirsty, let him come unto me and drink. Vampire 7:37
Just one old soldiers opinion. E Tenebris Lux. Pax quaeritur bello.Comment
-
No, Spencer, all that means is that it is selective. Eugenics requires intent to modify the gene pool.Comment
-
Yeah I realized I was wrong about the culling of females since there is no genetic selection in that case and I was not really thinking of a eugenics definition as I wrote it. It will still select against genes occuring in naturally prolific pairings although it is unlikely there is intent to do so or any presumed benefit to the human race.Last edited by SpencerH; November 21, 2009, 11:10.We need seperate human-only games for MP/PBEM that dont include the over-simplifications required to have a good AI
If any man be thirsty, let him come unto me and drink. Vampire 7:37
Just one old soldiers opinion. E Tenebris Lux. Pax quaeritur bello.Comment
Comment