Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Eugenics - Humane or Inhumane? Watch

    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    If we were living in a world where the weak didn't suffer, then i'd be against it. But fact is we do. We could solve so many issues. I'm not exactly a modernity fan, think indigenous peoples and classics lived much better lives in some senses (and brutally horrible ones in others) but since we've let the genie out of the bottle why stop? Eugenics could cure and prevent chances of diseases, prevent the breeding of stupid people which could also prevent wars etc, prevent the raising of ugly people who will leave unfufiling marital lives. How much suffering could be prevented?

    I for one look forward to a future where everyone will have less chances of death and live healthy lives.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    If I had it my way, I'd genetically modify the population so that everyone is a top class ballroom dancer. No more hunched posture in hold, no more stiff hip action, no more lousy footwork. Tens from Len all round!
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Len Goodman)
    If I had it my way, I'd genetically modify the population so that everyone is a top class ballroom dancer. No more hunched posture in hold, no more stiff hip action, no more lousy footwork. Tens from Len all round!
    Bloody hell Len!
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Len Goodman)
    If I had it my way, I'd genetically modify the population so that everyone is a top class ballroom dancer. No more hunched posture in hold, no more stiff hip action, no more lousy footwork. Tens from Len all round!
    Made me laugh
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Eugenics is the natural progression of the species, now we basically have the capacity for primitive "designer babies" it won't be long until liberal eugenics is widely applied.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Eugenics is the natural progression of the species, now we basically have the capacity for primitive "designer babies" it won't be long until liberal eugenics is widely applied.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I'm excited for the future in terms of eugenics c:
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AshEntropy)
    I'm excited for the future in terms of eugenics c:
    Could have had it 70 years ago, although with a load of pseudoscience on the side

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Eugenics is one of those things that is both incredibly good, yet evil at the same time.

    You're basically denying life to those who don't fill a certain criteria. It ranges from crippling genetic disorders to simply wanting kids with a certain hair colour. While some may claim those are polar opposites you have to keep in consideration that the criteria on preferential genetics is forever changing. What is considered inhumane can change within a few decades never mind centuries.

    Also keep in mind, if eugenics were strictly used today, many of us would not be here. Even those of us who are seen as average and completely healthy seeing eugenics often relies on the cost on society to help support such individuals. Under such ideas those simply born premature would be abandoned, aka classical and medieval style. If that was the case many people such as myself would not of been given the chance of life, despite the initial hurdles, who would eventually grow up to be perfectly healthy individuals.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SkyRees)
    Would sex selection fall under that? I don't know, that's the only part of the designer baby thing I kind of got. If you have a gender preference and you're going to take amazing care of the child does it matter?
    The problem with that isn't so much moral (in my opinion) but societal and population consequences.

    If a couple of people decide they want a boy instead of a girl, big deal right?

    But if you see that on a population scale, where culturally it is seen as important or preferable to have a boy or (vice versa) you may end up with gender imbalances in the population which can cause societal issues.

    This can already be seen in many countries, most notably and commonly known being China. But other countries also have some gender imbalances which have been causing problems (such as people being unable to find partners due to lack of the opposite sex on a population scale, birth rate decline which can in turn exacerbate the ageing population crisis etc).

    So with things like this I think it's important not only to look at the individual morals, but also the broader impact it can have.
    • TSR Support Team
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    The only time I'm ok with having a baby of a certain gender would be if you carried a gene which meant those of a certain gender had a disease.

    Wanting a boy just because you already have 4 girls, no.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AshEntropy)
    Before we get into the discussion, let's define a few words:

    Eugenics: "Eugenics is a set of beliefs and practices that aims at improving the genetic quality of the human population."

    Humane: "Having or showing compassion"

    Inhumane: "without compassion for misery or suffering; cruel"

    Personally, I believe that eugenics, to an extent,is humane. Before people get extremely offended and start calling me a Nazi, please let me explain.

    I do not think that allowing a child to be born, knowing full well that the child will have a detrimental genetic disease is humane, in fact, it is arguably inhumane, using the definition I gave, depending on how you look at it.

    Please understand that I'm not saying we should run around and murder people that have genetic diseases or sterilise people, I'm just saying that to me it seems more humane to prevent the misery and suffering of a child by not giving birth to them knowing they will have a genetic disease that causes great suffering.

    I feel as though the word "Eugenics" has been tainted by Hitler and his actions, so now everyone associates it with atrocities.

    I'd like to know how other people feel about it though, what do you think?
    I feel pretty much the same as you


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Good example of how phrasing can lead answers.

    Yes, given your definitions, eugenics is humane. However, the result, designer babies, to me is a different question.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What newspaper do you read/prefer?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.