Magnus Berg (qmgb@bull.se)
Fri, 16 Jan 1998 04:17:41 +0100
Hi Bo and Squad
> > The question I have, simply put, is, "Is eugenics moral?" Now it is
> > easily arguable that eugenics for racial
> > reasons is not, because useful ideas are lost. But what of the
> > mentally handicapped and retarded? Those who most likely will not
> > contribute to the intellectual quality in the least. It is
> > impossible for me to believe that these people must be lost. That
> > these people don't have a quality of their own. I hope you can help
> > me, because as of now I can't find an answer in Pirsig's works.
I'd say that eugenics is moral as long as it stimulates diversity,
it must never inhibit diversity.
I've noticed that often when a problem seems difficult - even when
applying the MoQ to it - the source of the problem is (always)
the dynamic/static conflict. It's the old Yin - Yang, good - evil
controversies in a new disguise.
I guess there's an upper limit to the amount of diversity being
stimulated, but I don't think we'd ever get near it.
And about the mentally handicapped and retarded, maybe they don't
contribute intellectually directly. But they sure as h-ll have an
indirect dynamic impact on people around them. Phrases like "he
brings out the best in me" and "she made me look at the world through
her eyes" are common in this context.
The worst form of eugenics is when people inhibit diversity on the
arrogant premises that they know what's best in the long run. They
don't have a clue! Nobody has.
Magnus
-- post message - mailto:lilasqd@hkg.com unsubscribe/queries - mailto:diana@asiantravel.com homepage - http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/4670
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu May 13 1999 - 16:42:38 CEST