Dawkins if of course correct here. Many are reading a moral argument into his tweet that does not exist. All he is saying is that humans would respond to selection just like any other animal. That's undeniably true. Nowhere does he say we should act on that fact. Calm down folks.https://twitter.com/RichardDawkins/status/1228943686953664512 …
-
Show this thread
-
The problem with selectively breeding humans isn't that it's impossible, it's that it is immoral.
56 replies 34 retweets 438 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @SwipeWright
Is it immoral to favor mates who have good heritable traits? If so, why?
9 replies 1 retweet 29 likes -
Replying to @primalpoly
Not on a personal level, no. We all have our dating preferences! What's immoral is any government program trying to guide selection at the population level.
4 replies 0 retweets 28 likes
Replying to @SwipeWright
As a libertarian, I would never support coercive eugenics. Freedom of mate choice is fundamental. But historically many advocates of eugenics have favored voluntary initiatives based on education, not coercion.
8:15 AM - 16 Feb 2020
0 replies
0 retweets
10 likes
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.