10 Questions For Every Christian

[Winchester]

[quote name='Hassan' date='02 July 2010 - 01:59 PM' timestamp='1278093579' post='2136963']
Nevertheless, I don't agree with your conclusions. Survival of the fittest is a mechanism that helps ensure the 'progress' of the species. It isn't anything that is necessarily of any value in itself. But even if it were, it is difficult to say for sure what constitutes the 'most fit'. There isn't some static, objective standard because our environment is constantly changing. Would you propose killing off everyone with the Sickle-Cell gene? Carrying that gene may be seen as a genetic defect. Unless, of course, Malaria became a worldwide problem a few centuries down the line. Then it's a pretty beaver dam helpful genetic benefit. [/quote]
As I said, it can't be done helter skelter. As for sickle cell, it's a bad thing with an accidental good effect. Shortened life spans might be an advantage. A truly advanced society could promot this amongst certain populations to reduce the need for long term care. So there's another advantage, if one removes human dignity.
[quote]
A pure rationalist can oppose slavery. As the Soviets found out when they tried to use Gulag slave labor to usurp the West, slavery is economically inefficient.
[/quote]
As I said:
[quote]acceptable to an atheist unless practical reasons are brought out. [/quote]

[quote]I don't believe in God and I'd oppose everything you recommend here. And it has nothing to do with right or wrong. It's because your proposing drastic, and possibly irreversible, changes to very complex systems (like the gene pool) that we still really don't understand. Humanity is complex and I'd have serious doubt about our ability to do any cost-benefit analysis on the scale you are proposing that is really at all meaningful or helpful.
[/quote]
I didn't propose doing it without careful thought. It is acceptable to strive for if there is no moral order, which there is not for the atheist unless it be a construct of man. You misunderstood my argument.

[Hassan]

[quote name='Winchester' date='02 July 2010 - 02:18 PM' timestamp='1278094717' post='2136968']
As I said, it can't be done helter skelter. As for sickle cell, it's a bad thing with an accidental good effect. Shortened life spans might be an advantage. A truly advanced society could promot this amongst certain populations to reduce the need for long term care. So there's another advantage, if one removes human dignity.

As I said:



I didn't propose doing it without careful thought. It is acceptable to strive for if there is no moral order, which there is not for the atheist unless it be a construct of man. You misunderstood my argument.
[/quote]

Maybe I have. What is the point of all this future tampering?

[Winchester]

[quote name='Hassan' date='02 July 2010 - 02:45 PM' timestamp='1278096358' post='2136976']
Maybe I have. What is the point of all this future tampering?
[/quote]
I don't argue that it's neccessary. Only that the traditional reason for avoiding it (human dignity) is meaningless.