You could, and in some instances ~you'd be correct~. Eugenics was a major branch of science for decades, and considered objective truth, even though it was the epitome of a social construct
-
-
Doesn’t eugenics work for dogs ? Eugenism is more about morality (it is obviously bad for many reasons) than science.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @BanjoBouchon @whsource
Breeding =/= eugenics. Eugenics is predicated on the idea that there are characteristics that are objectively "better" about some people compared to others, which goes back to our socially constructed attitudes towards what is considered "better"
7 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GidMK @BanjoBouchon
It's not a social construct to believe that one could select humans for certain traits though. What's socially constructed is the traits we choose to select, and the ethics around what methods we use.
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @whsource @BanjoBouchon
Sure, but the entire purpose of eugenics as a science was to first define what traits we value and then select for them in the population. And this was a massive field which continued in California well into the 60s and 70s
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Idk, it’s more like a social ideology « using science » to achieve something. Like medicine, in a way, use science to achieve the goal of keeping peoples alive and healthy. (which is not a given, like when patient would prefer we help them die quickly and painlessly)
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
I would say that eugenics has a philosophical aspect to it and a scientific aspect to it. Like medecine. It’s part science but motivated by a philosophy about what matter.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @BanjoBouchon @whsource
Problem is, that's just an arbitrary separation between two concepts. Where does the "scientific" element of eugenics end and the philosophical part begin? Without a value proposition about which human traits are better, eugenics ceases to exist
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
In a similar way, without a philosophical purpose behind it, medicine is just a series of facts. But facts inform theories, and theories are inherently connected to society. Without theory, science is largely meaningless
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Ok, if some society realized that putting alcohol on a cut help prevent infection, it’s meaningless if they don’t have a global theory of medecine ?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Of course. They could ascribe the prevention of infection when alcohol is present to witchcraft, and burn anyone who did so at the stake
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.