is humanity going to get progressively more stupid?

Question

since darwin died and out with him his theory...LOL....now we have idiots running the show,,uh ohhhh....are we all going to get more stupid as the generations continue?......would it be that far fetched that adolph was actually darwins theory in work, he wanted to kill congenitally defected people, retarded people, you get my drift,,, what do you think a world would be like if we did kill off all of those less so perfect people and kept only highly intelligent people? versus where our future is heading now? just curious what you think

Wow, this question brought in the "know it alls" or as i like to call them ******* RETARDS..........LOL,,, ******* stupid ***** trying to correct everything, what a lame whore, suck mydick ****, you're ANNOYING. anyway when i was refering to adolph, adolf, hilter,,,,and i will refer to him however i please, you loser ****, anyway like maybe he saw the stupidity and a gene kicked in and that gene started saying KILL THOSE IDIOTS FOR YOUR CHILDREN DO NOT LET THOSE IDIOTS BREED WITH YOUR CHILDREN...or something like that you know...anyway when i talk about these stupid peopleit's just the opposite it's mother ******* that conform...it's very destructive mindless idiots.....kind of like you ******* that train banged my post you loserfukcs,,,,JESUS CHRIST IVE NEVER SEEN SUCH STUPID FUKCING RESPONSES YOU PEOPLE NEED TO BE EXTERMINATED, with a few exceptions a few of you people answered decently

p.s,, univee, you are the most dense idiot on the planet, first you made assumptions about my views. and then said i was being presumptuous? you have got to be one of the most backward idiots on the face of the planet get out of your head you god damn jack azz

Answer 1

The killing off of the less fit to 'enhance' the gene pool was a huge movement in the early 1900s (at least in academic discussions). It was called the time of eugenics. Eugenicists made lists of traits that should be removed by 'genetic cleansing' and thought it would help the human race. There are many problems with this type of thinking. First, how do you know that a genetic trait does not have an interaction affect with another genetic trait? For example (and this is only an example--I do not claim that it is true), if the genetic code for blue eyes and the genetic code for left-handedness are together in a person, then that person is more intelligent. According to eugenists, left-handedness was one of the traits that we should try to 'weed out'. So, if that were done, we would loose the intelligence gained by it blending with blue eyes. In addition, we could find that a trait that 'appears' at the time undesirable has importance in fighting some future disease. Secondly, and this may be the most important question of eugenics, comes the question: Who gets to decide what genes to destroy and kill? That person or those people would have immense power and would be 'playing God' Do you trust anyone (other than yourself) to make those decisions? They may just come up with a reason to kill you for a trait in your genetic code that you think is not that important.

Be careful not to want utopia so much that you end up with dystopia. It is always a balancing act. I say, let nature do the balancing; she seems to do a decent job at it.

Answer 2

You have a dark and unreasoning heart if you think you can decide who is fit and who is not. What would your standard of intelligence be? Conformity, or original thought? Many would say that those that do not bow their heads and conform to the master plan of government are not smart, so you would kill them? But what if your government is evil? Did you not then just kill the only people with the sense to know this and the courage to stand against it?

You see, what's wrong with fascism, eugenics, master race theories and all this crap is that it supposes that the perfect citizen is a sheep, and the perfect leaders ruthless... and supposes that this is a good and proper thing.

Thanks, but you can keep this. I'll oppose fascism and let it be known widely.

You assume it is the defective among us who make the world horrible.

I assume it is the monsters without soul, such as possibly yourself. If anyone needs weeding out, it is the nazis with their plans for eliminating all nonuniformity.

Answer 3

No. Our leaders and intelligentsia have always come from the top 10%. You can't judge the whole of the population by what you see or hear in your own environment. The unfortunates that you cite represent only 10% of the bottom strata. The majority is still OK. As for any propagation of them only about 10% of those will suceed in reproducting and there is about a 1 in 4 or less chance, the trait will be recessive. The net result is that the drift of the population is always toward the norm. However, this is mostly the result of cultural bias rather than deliberate thought.

Answer 4

Well, while I hardly subscribe to your views that "adolf had it right all along"... in fact quite the reverse, it's an interesting fact that a couple of hundred years ago, those who were "not quite the sharpest lemons in the basket" would have probably found suitably idiotic ways to dispose of themselves... Hence leaving more intelectually astute folks to carry the torch.

Todays world is so obsessed with safety and medical advancements that those with a few less marbles can carry on with just as much success as those who would perhaps be called the brightest... Don't get me wrong... Everybody deserves a chance in life and I wouldn't want to change anything, but it does make you wonder...

Of course, when you consider that artificial intelligence is "evolving" at a rate of 10,000x that of biological intelligence, how much longer will even the most intellignet among us have before they too are considered intelectually inferior to our own creations? And at that point, would it be "artifical" intellignece at all?!

Could make this whole discussion irrelevant...

Answer 5

First of all its Adolf Hitler and should be refered to as Hitler, not apolph (sic).
Second, an ellipsis has three periods, not three commas.
Third, to suggest that Hitler having executed entire races of people and that it somehow parallels Darwins theory, is ludicrous.
Darwin's theory, in a nutshell, suggests that those who are incapable of adapting to their enviroment die off, while those who can adapt survive and thrive. Hitler, on the other hand, executed those that he believed hindered the progress of society. Murder and evolution are not the same.

It would have been wise had you done at the very least some loose research. Your smug and unintelligent question is offensive and at the very least this site would have been better off had you kept your dwindling intelligence away from it.

Answer 6

I think we are getting progressively less intelligent. I partially blame technology for making us lazy. However, some of the dumbest people have some of the most brilliant children, so to kill off the dummies might be harmful to mankind. I think everyone, no matter how smart, plays a role in the evolution of the human race.

Answer 7

My God, If I only had a dollar for someone who stated the worlds problems are because of liberal/conservative thinking is the cause of societies ills...

The problem is US, the human condition, with one foot in the primortal past, and the other in mind-numbing technology

Answer 8

It seems that liberal philosphoy in this world is what is causing the downfall of humanity. As long as the brainwashing by the liberal media continues to be successful, there is no doubt that we will ruin our own civilization.

Answer 9

nah, the same stupid, and new stupids, but not more stupid.

Answer 10

HOW IRONIC> please see the philosophy question just below yours for the answer.