[quote]alexus wrote:
One more thing before I well and truly stop ranting…
This is part of why I find it so abhorrent that people think there are facts about the genetic value or worth of a potential partner. That some people are genetically superior to others. Firstly, how outwardly successful someone is depends significantly on the environment in which they are placed. Secondly, the combination of genes is what is passed on to the next generation. Most people do carry recessive genes for a whole host of genetic disorders. That only matters if your partner carries recessive genes for those same genetic disorders and that manifests as a disease in environmental conditions the offspring finds themselves in.
Of course genes for genetic disorders might be protective against certain environmental conditions (e.g., recessive gene for sickle cell anemia seems to be protective against malaria). Which is why we might want to be careful indeed about aiming to eradicate genes when we don’t quite know the direction environmental change is going to take or what positive effects those genes might confer on individuals in such environments.
So… There really isn’t any such thing as ‘the best partner’ simplicitor. Only ‘the best partner for me’. And we keep our fingers crossed about the environment.
\rant.[/quote]
I like your earlier two posts and what I’m about to say isn’t “politically correct” but there ARE genetic advantages and they do get passed along easy enough to be valuable. Many of our chronic diseases are genetic (no, I’m not ignoring environmental factors) and high intelligence is largely genetic. I agree that nurture, nature, environment, etc., are all very strong factors that influence the development of a person, but you’re not taking the “average Joe” and turning him into a genius, no matter how well he’s nurtured and educated. Period.
Let’s not pretend that human reproduction is much more complicated than animal husbandry. I can have a kennel of dogs with hip dysplasia - and with proper testing and systematic culling, breed the disease out of my future generations. I can manipulate appearance and, if I’m very exacting with my culling, I can even manipulate performance in a given endeavor, such as hunting.
To pretend we cannot do this with humans is folly. I do however agree with you about your point regarding genetic diversity - it’s a good thing. But that doesn’t mean that you couldn’t pick and choose genetically superior people from different creeds.
I forget their names, but two world class, olympic level sprinters bore a child together. I don’t care if the kid never trains for track a day in its life - that child has a very small chance of ever being “slow” afoot unless it becomes obese. Yes, gene expression and inheritance are complex, but we can easily stack the dice in our favor.
And when we keep stacking the dice after successive generations, we generally get the results we are looking for. But given that such an endeavor would need to be coordinated, and performed after successive generations, and this has never been done - I cannot point to such a real life example to “prove” my point.
