For those determined to miss the point, I deplore the idea of a eugenic policy. I simply said deploring it doesn’t mean it wouldn’t work. Just as we breed cows to yield more milk, we could breed humans to run faster or jump higher. But heaven forbid that we should do it.
-
-
Show this thread
-
A eugenic policy would be bad. I’m combating the illogical step from “X would be bad” to “So X is impossible”. It would work in the same sense as it works for cows. Let’s fight it on moral grounds. Deny obvious scientific facts & we lose – or at best derail – the argument.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Technically you are once again correct. However, humans (sadly) are quite a horrible species so unfortunately all technical tools are fraught with peril.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
The comments show that people don't actually care about the point being made. They instead care about proving their morally superior to Richard Dawkins. Problem is their intentional misrepresentation of his point proves they're not even that. They're just even more wrong.
-
Maybe Dawkins is a really shitty writer then, and he should work on his delivery. For starters, I think any copy editor who cared would point out that "work" is a vague cop out...at best.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Way to deliberately misunderstand what was said.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
Hey, uh, good luck with this one, man
-
Also, ignoring the hideous ethical and moral violations imposing eugenics would require, it’s probably quite difficult to selectively breed your own species and not one that reaches maturity within a few years. Also, what the hell?
- Show replies
New conversation -
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.
