Joined: Jan. 2006
|Is this not science? Why has this been discredited?|
Two separate questions here. Can humans, sufficiently organized and of common mind, breed themselves for certain traits considered desirable, or alternatively breed themselves to minimize traits not wanted? Well, yes, I suppose we could if we tried.
Presumably, we could also genetically engineer ourselves (assuming we have the techniques and knowledge) for similar purposes. The first approach is mostly passive, the second is active, but the goals are the same.
Would it "work"? I suppose it would, again presuming near-universal agreement about the goals and methods.
There are societies (China and India come to mind) where sexual selection of embryos have led to imbalences in sexual distribution (too many men), which in turn are causing social accomodations not anticipated beforehand. I imagine if we had much finer discrimination of embryo characteristics (i.e, skin color, sexual orientation, etc.) we could selectively make matters much worse than they are.
The basic question has been posed long since: Would a Congress of gorillas, given this capability, have chosen humans? Would they have abandoned greater strength, superior ability to live in the jungle, better protection against the elements, etc.? Given universal agreement and determination, humans could breed for desired characteristics (within some limitations, since breeding doesn't seem to affect some characteristics). Would the result be *better* people? I certainly wouldn't want to pass that judgment.