I personally believe there is no way for them to succeed. If they were acting in good faith the actual incease in the number of intelligent people, who would recognize cruelty when they see it, would tear it down. If they acted in bad faith, which they most definitely would, they would fill the world with these idiots.

  • Tedesche@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    6 days ago

    There is no contradiction there. The “although, it is” simply acknowledges that eugenics is unwise; the point is that that isn’t what makes it a morally bad idea.

    And there’s no magic going on. Morality and intelligence just aren’t the same thing and aren’t linked in any way. Smarter people are not necessarily more moral or vice versa.

    • Daftydux@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      6 days ago

      That is just not true. Morals involve reason and logic. Take one ethics class. Take one single ethics class.

      “eugenics is unwise”

      Is a statement describing applying reason to derive a moral understanding.

      You can have morals that use simple or flawed reason but that is indicative of low intelligence.

      • Tedesche@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 days ago

        Yes, morals utilize reason and logic, but that doesn’t mean you’re necessarily more moral if you’re smarter. At best, it might mean that certain moral perspectives are easier to grasp if you’re smarter, but even if you grasp them that doesn’t mean you hold them.

        “eugenics is unwise”

        Is a statement describing applying reason to derive a moral understanding.

        No. It’s a statement asserting that eugenics has flaws and drawbacks that will ultimately prove detrimental to its own goal. This has nothing to do with the moral argument against it.

        • Daftydux@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          6 days ago

          A single person can be immoral but that doesnt mean morality doesnt exsist. They acknowledge they are being immoral by not applying reason and are stupid to do so. Yes the individual can benefit from being immoral but we are talking about society, when referring to eugenics, which does not benefit from immoral behavior.

          • Tedesche@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            5 days ago

            You seem really set on insisting that there’s a link between intelligence and morality, and at this point I don’t think I have the energy to disabuse you of that notion. Suffice it to say, you’re wrong on both the individual and societal levels. Much of the history of civilization is war, and involved in that comes conquest and reorganization of societal boundaries. Pretty much every society today is the product of a chain of wars. Are you going to say all societies are bad, just because there’s blood in their foundations?

            The world isn’t as black-and-white as you’re painting it. Intelligence isn’t linked to morality and morality itself is more gray than black-and-white. That latter part is something you should definitely have learned in your ethics class.

            • Daftydux@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              5 days ago

              I dont know what to tell you. Youre not someone I would goto for insight into intelligence or morality.