Is this really necessary?

[Atekimogus]

I'm not saying that saving kids or helping the sick or disabled is bad, I'm just saying that it definitely affects the way that nature has thinned the heard for the entire history of ever. Back in the day, some guy jumps off the barn... well, if the fall didn't get him than the infection will, or the gangrene, or... Nowadays, we just patch him up and send him on his way to keep doing stupid shit AND pass along his stupid-shit-doing genome.

On the other hand we don't loose smart and intelligent people to small scratches and infections, appendicitis and other stuff which can easily happen to the best of us.

Also, stupidity as most people view it seems more to be a problem of the upbringing than any inherent flaw in the genome. I know quite a few stupid persons coming from very successful and intelligent parents who just haven't given shit about their children and vice versa.

Also, seeing as evolution was long at work and we only managed fairly recently in the history of mankind to eliminate those sicknesses you described and stupidity didn't die out during all those times it's fairly save to assume that it has little to do with the - as you call it - stupid-shit-doing genome.

[Mikey]

There's "assholery," there's ignorance, and then there's stupidity. All three are different. Stupidity, for its part, is bred in the bones. Smart people can do dumb things, but someone who is stupid is stupid, independent of upbringing. A propensity to to stupid shit may be different from that, but for purposes of this discussion may be included. Whether that is a product of nature vs. nurture may be contested, but in either case is something that can be passed along families.

[Atekimogus]

Of course it runs in the family. But that is not because they pass along "inferior" genes.

My point is, evolution and natural selection has had a few thousand years to eliminate the stupid. It did not which - for me - is proof that the stupidity you are refering to is entirely a societal thing. Monkey see, Monkey do. Childs watching their parents picking their noses all day long are probably doing the same thing. That doesn't mean that they wouldn't succeed if they are put into a more stimulating enviroment.

And to be honest, your suggestion that some kind of stupidity is bred into the bones...I find mildy offensive.

Now if we are to talk about not stupid people but mentally disabled persons - like people suffering from down syndrome - I would like to point out that above argument still holds true, evolution or natural selection didn't succed in eliminating those DNA diseases which means it entirely up to us to cure humankind of those sicknesses.

But the thought to let run natural selection it's course in hopes that things will get better....I don't know, makes me feel uncomfortable...that road leads to death camps imho.

[Mikey]

And to be honest, your suggestion that some kind of stupidity is bred into the bones...I find mildy offensive.

Probably because you misinterpreted it. This is a separate statement than that of some component of stupidity being hereditary. This is simply a statement that some people are just stupid, independent of circumstance, rearing, or anything else. Not ignorant, not misinformed, not victimized by inferior education, just stupid.

Now if we are to talk about not stupid people but mentally disabled persons - like people suffering from down syndrome - I would like to point out that above argument still holds true, evolution or natural selection didn't succed in eliminating those DNA diseases which means it entirely up to us to cure humankind of those sicknesses.

Well, I wasn't talking about mentally disabled people, but OK. This is a good example of humanity has circumvented natural selection, no matter how natural that circumvention may be. The fact that we are avoiding the process is probably an innate feature of sapience, at least of sapience combined with emotional motivation.

But the thought to let run natural selection it's course in hopes that things will get better....I don't know, makes me feel uncomfortable...that road leads to death camps imho.

Er, OK, but nobody mentioned any idea like that.

[Captain Picard's Hair]

In "The Enemy," the Romulan soldier was surprised that Geordi's parents "let him live." We don't have technology to fully replace lost vision (or hearing, etc) yet, but such things are being cooked up in labs as we speak.

I myself have a debilitating mental condition which some speculate to be a fairly new disease; descriptions of it date to the early days of 'modern' psychiatry but there are no clear descriptions of such a condition in the prior historical record. It is difficult to get a clear answer of course when all we have to go on are the descriptions of ancient people who lacked a modern understanding of the brain. Somewhat ironically, this kind of disorder is one only a human is capable of experiencing (in its full effect) since it depends on "higher" psychological functions and highly sophisticated brain regions like the prefrontal cortex which don't exist or are much smaller in other animals. The prefrontal cortex is one of the key areas that makes our brains so distinct, being where much of the extra brain mass we have is concentrated and being responsible for higher functions which don't exist in many animals.

I don't take offense to some of the above statements, though in fact due to the disabling effects of said condition I do rely heavily on social support to get by. Without medicaid the cost of my medications alone would be a heavy weight on my family. Without getting into the nitty-gritty of it and whether or not it had any role in my development of diabetes, the mental condition alone is one which is believed to be largely hereditary and which I can say from personal experience is a significant evolutionary weakness. To put it bluntly, patients with this disorder have a sharply lower rate of reproductive success; in other words, it ain't too good for your chances of getting laid. Since the rates of "direct" propagation of such a condition are fairly low in general, the predisposition must be carried by others who either express the phenotype to a significantly weaker extent or who aren't symptomatic at all (some estimates put the expression of the broad phenotype at close to 10% though only around 1% of the general population is stuck in my boat with the full-on disease).

-----

I can't say for certain the significance of my plight to this scenario but it's a live example of a "weak" organism getting by with support from fellow people. It's too early in the research to know the exact evolutionary role of this condition such that there is one. I'd rather not argue the nuances of what is or isn't stupid or what kinds of foolish behaviors are tied to genetics in what ways, but it's clear that people have, in a remarkably short period of evolutionary history, exercised an unprecedented degree of control over evolution - and not only in our own species. For example, the humble corn crop is not of natural origins but is the result of selective breeding of grains over generations of native central american populations.

[Captain Picard's Hair]

... which, by the way, makes the objection of some to more modern tinkering with corn doubly amusing.

[Atekimogus]

Probably because you misinterpreted it. This is a separate statement than that of some component of stupidity being hereditary. This is simply a statement that some people are just stupid, independent of circumstance, rearing, or anything else. Not ignorant, not misinformed, not victimized by inferior education, just stupid.

Fair enough. I admit I do have problems understanding your definition of stupid. (Maybe because I am, who knows ). Either way, your quote about stupid people being patched up and allowed to spread their genome led me to believe that first you think stupidity is a biological matter (which it rarly is) and second that you rather would thin the human genepool by excluding "stupid" people from procreating.

Well, I wasn't talking about mentally disabled people, but OK. This is a good example of humanity has circumvented natural selection, no matter how natural that circumvention may be. The fact that we are avoiding the process is probably an innate feature of sapience, at least of sapience combined with emotional motivation.

Once again I do get the impression that you think this isn't actually a good thing. I for one am glad that we are able to circumvent natural selection because, you know it IS pretty unreliable. You might loose quite a few superb genes just due to freak accidents for example, if you only want to concentrate on the "quality" of DNA. (Well, even writing this I feel like I am degrading live.....)
Also, it is actually pretty self serving and efficient to patch people up and allowing them to continue their life. I, for example, would probably have died the first time at the age of 3 because of having my tonsils out, the next time at age 6 because of hernia inguinalis, then at age 14 because of appendicitis etc. etc. . And yet, here I am being a productive member of society.

[Mikey]

There's an interesting exception, I think. Something that can be passed on without expression in the parent - like Tay-Sachs in my own ethnic gene pool, or like CPH describes above - would be largely immune to the effects of natural selection anyway. A carrier won't feel any effects in its day-to-day living from the condition which it is carrying, so there would be no effect for natural selection to affect.

[Captain Picard's Hair]

There's an interesting exception, I think. Something that can be passed on without expression in the parent - like Tay-Sachs in my own ethnic gene pool, or like CPH describes above - would be largely immune to the effects of natural selection anyway. A carrier won't feel any effects in its day-to-day living from the condition which it is carrying, so there would be no effect for natural selection to affect.

Plus, there's a role in "nurture" in actually developing the illness I have. A number of specific triggers have been proposed, most of which occur to the developing fetus during pregnancy. One of the more interesting ones is an influenza infection in the mother; these are particularly relevant during the second trimester which is an important period in the early development of the brain. A person with a genetic susceptibility to a condition like mine or many others may never develop any signs if not exposed to the needed triggers. Really only a few disorders like Downs syndrome really are fully hereditary.