Travis Ekbom  💣

What experts and laity are criticising Dawkins for is the fact that the practice of eugenics is inherently ideological since it entails the question of deciding which traits are desirable in humans. Dawkins kinda overlooked that slight fact

The problem with eugenics is that everyone relates it to phenotype characteristics such as skin color and eye color, but not to people with Huntington's disease, dystrophy or diabetes ... Some genes shouldn't exist.

Should the genes that cause ALS exist? If we had taken measures to exterminate those genes we would never have seen Lou Gehrig or Stephen Hawking. Would humanity have been improved by their absence? I suspect the list of great people with diabetes is quite a bit longer.

I can't see a worse world if people don't develop diabetes or die of sclerosis, having diabetes or asthma doesn't make you a better scientist.

It doesn't make you a worse one. Eliminating those genes requires eliminating valuable contributors to the fields of science, technology, arts, philosophy... The inability to see a worse world is a lack of imagination, not evidence for your argument.

How so?