From: Lee Corbin (lcorbin@tsoft.com)
Date: Thu Aug 23 2001 - 00:00:49 MDT
Hi Emlyn!
> If that is your aim, then "Eugenics" is not the word you want. From
> Dictionary.com:
>
> ---
> euˇgenˇics (y-jnks)
> n. (used with a sing. verb)
> The study of hereditary improvement of the human race by controlled
> selective breeding.
> ---
>
> Note "controlled selective breeding". ie: selecting the fittest members of a
> generation, by given fitness criteria, and allowing only those chosen
> members to breed.
>
> The important point is that selective breeding is a centrally controlled
> process. The breeders themselves do not make the choice about who breeds;
> some external agency does. This is exactly the historical usage of the term.
Yes, thanks for that. While I might squirm and try to
suppose that "controlled" could still mean the people
doing the controlling (in a non-centralized way), even
then the ambiguity of the term would do me in. I think
that you've put the last nail in the coffin!
Oh. Do you think that when Galton and the late 19th century
types used the word (speaking of historical usage), they had
in mind government force? Or did the various Eugenics Societies
merely encourage the "fit" to breed and the unfit not to? I
recall the right-wing William Shockley proposing that we pay
$1000 per I.Q. point below 100 to people to not have children.
If I had a real nation, and I cared about whether it prospered
in a competitive world, I think that I'd go along with his
proposal!
Lee
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:10:00 MST