Skeptic Friends Network

Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?
Home | Forums | Active Topics | Active Polls | Register | FAQ | Contact Us  
  Connect: Chat | SFN Messenger | Buddy List | Members
Personalize: Profile | My Page | Forum Bookmarks  
 All Forums
 Our Skeptic Forums
 Creation/Evolution
 Stupid hypothetical Evolution question
 New Topic  Topic Locked
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Previous Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 3

Dude
SFN Die Hard

USA
6891 Posts

Posted - 11/23/2005 :  22:53:27   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Dude a Private Message
quote:
Is not our lifespan dependent upon our intelligence?



Only partly. There are many species on the planet that have lifespans significantly longer than humans. Some tortise species can live hundreds of years, some bacteria can live thousands.

quote:
Reproductive success is about having more kids (who go on to have kids themselves) than competing species.


Sure. But it is all about living long enough to do it. Once you reproduce and pass on your genes to the next generation, you are a success. But yes, if you are capable of continued reproduction throughout a very long (comparatively) lifespan then that could also be an advantage.


Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson

"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin

Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth
Go to Top of Page

dv82matt
SFN Regular

760 Posts

Posted - 11/24/2005 :  00:09:48   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send dv82matt a Private Message
Personally I don't think that it would be ethical to forcibly sterilize them, even at the cost of losing what we currently think of as humanity.

From an evolutionary perspective, we would be inferior to these "offspring" of humanity. If we were to attempt sterilization, or other breeding control programs, we'd be engaging in eugenics merely to maintain the status quo.

If we felt eugenics was justified in this scenario, perhaps we could more profitably alter our own genotype to gift ourselves with the advantages of the mutants but retain our relatively high intelligence.

Consider the following scenario: There is a mutation that increases a persons IQ by %50. The gene is recesive however, and left to itself it will be diluted out of the human population altogether. In this case, would those with the mutation be justified in sterilizing, or otherwise controlling the breeding of, the rest of humanity?
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 3 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Previous Page
 New Topic  Topic Locked
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Jump To:

The mission of the Skeptic Friends Network is to promote skepticism, critical thinking, science and logic as the best methods for evaluating all claims of fact, and we invite active participation by our members to create a skeptical community with a wide variety of viewpoints and expertise.


Home | Skeptic Forums | Skeptic Summary | The Kil Report | Creation/Evolution | Rationally Speaking | Skeptillaneous | About Skepticism | Fan Mail | Claims List | Calendar & Events | Skeptic Links | Book Reviews | Gift Shop | SFN on Facebook | Staff | Contact Us

Skeptic Friends Network
© 2008 Skeptic Friends Network Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 0.08 seconds.
Powered by @tomic Studio
Snitz Forums 2000