In article <xn0i5000k3f03o...@news.iphouse.com>,
"Dan Goodman" <dsg...@iphouse.com> wrote:
> Children are being gene-engineered, raised, and educated for sanity.
> What traits might be encouraged?
Elimination of whatever it is that makes males go crazy at about sixteen and not recover until about 26--as reflected in crime rates, insurance rates, etc.
> In article <xn0i5000k3f03o...@news.iphouse.com>,
> "Dan Goodman" <dsg...@iphouse.com> wrote:
>> Children are being gene-engineered, raised, and educated for sanity.
>> What traits might be encouraged?
> Elimination of whatever it is that makes males go crazy at about sixteen
> and not recover until about 26--as reflected in crime rates, insurance
> rates, etc.
I'd see more than one option. If genetic engineering can be one off, and characteristics are selected by parents, you'd get one set, but if the state is doing the engineering, raising and engineering, then there are several different models that might be moved toward. Who defines sanity? Are bad dreams, the ability to slip into PTSD, revulsion about talking physiology and medical detail while eating sane? Should a sane citizen accept public announcements as truth without question? Should there be some sort of icon or logo that automatically tells video watchers the information they're about to receive is true, and that countervailing information is information terrorism?
The insanity that David talks about is useful for young soldiers, who march forward when bits of lead are flying at them.
Is religion sane? Is knee-jerk conservatism a religious state? Is being "liberal" insane?
Who defines what is sane? If you want a truly passive, productive populace, then reduce that old sense of curiosity, train the majority to be uncomfortable if they aren't working, and to accept authority without question. Engineer and train another, smaller, group to be that authority.
On Thu, 01 Nov 2012 06:14:12 -0800, Bill Swears <wswe...@gci.net>
wrote:
> train the majority to be uncomfortable if they aren't working, and to > accept authority without question. Engineer and train another, > smaller, group to be that authority.
Would you really want that second set? It would have to have a greater
amount of free will, which is always a bad thing for such societies.
A bureaucracy should be the authority. If no one can possibly screw
things up so badly that people might have reason to question the
social order, it'll reinforce the engineering.
> On Thursday, November 1, 2012 10:14:03 AM UTC-4, Bill Swears wrote:
>> Who defines what is sane? If you want a truly passive, productive
>> populace, then reduce that old sense of curiosity, train the majority to
>> be uncomfortable if they aren't working, and to accept authority without
>> question. Engineer and train another, smaller, group to be that authority.
> O brave new world, that has such people in't.
> Jim
I would keep it simpler. Engineer an appetite for reading, and a focused curiosity to fuel it. Doesn't matter about what. Even if you have a fraction of people who are maniacally focused upon the Kardashians (and thus lost to rational discourse) the same force will drive others to be profoundly interested in astronomy, or cancer research.
> > Children are being gene-engineered, raised, and educated for sanity.
> > What traits might be encouraged?
> Elimination of whatever it is that makes males go crazy at about sixteen
> and not recover until about 26--as reflected in crime rates, insurance
> rates, etc.
Just the other day I had almost the opposite idea. It's sort of in an amorphous state as yet, but I was thinking of a sort of family-ship situation where at least one space born human culture (since the environment can be controlled absolutely) decided to emphasize, slightly, the environmental factors that contribute to male sexual dimorphism during the growth of their children. (I was thinking of the claims that the development of boys is affected by estrogen in our water supply.)
So... probably more young male craziness and teenaged girls with smaller breasts.
David Friedman wrote:
> In article <xn0i5000k3f03o...@news.iphouse.com>,
> "Dan Goodman" <dsg...@iphouse.com> wrote:
> > Children are being gene-engineered, raised, and educated for sanity.
> > What traits might be encouraged?
> Elimination of whatever it is that makes males go crazy at about
> sixteen and not recover until about 26--as reflected in crime rates,
> insurance rates, etc.
Which might result in females moving into that social ecological niche;
similar to coyotes taking over the niche left empty when wolves are
eliminated.
-- Dan Goodman
Whatever you wish for me, may you have twice as much.
Bill Swears wrote:
> On 10/31/2012 9:41 PM, David Friedman wrote:
> > In article <xn0i5000k3f03o...@news.iphouse.com>,
> > "Dan Goodman" <dsg...@iphouse.com> wrote:
> > > Children are being gene-engineered, raised, and educated for
> > > sanity.
> > > What traits might be encouraged?
> > Elimination of whatever it is that makes males go crazy at about
> > sixteen and not recover until about 26--as reflected in crime
> > rates, insurance rates, etc.
> I'd see more than one option. If genetic engineering can be one off,
> and characteristics are selected by parents, you'd get one set, but
> if the state is doing the engineering, raising and engineering, then
> there are several different models that might be moved toward. Who
> defines sanity? Are bad dreams, the ability to slip into PTSD,
> revulsion about talking physiology and medical detail while eating
> sane? Should a sane citizen accept public announcements as truth
> without question? Should there be some sort of icon or logo that
> automatically tells video watchers the information they're about to
> receive is true, and that countervailing information is information
> terrorism?
What I had in mind is different groups advancing different versions of
sanity. Which might cause some conflicts.
-- Dan Goodman
Whatever you wish for me, may you have twice as much.
>> On 10/31/2012 9:41 PM, David Friedman wrote:
>>> In article <xn0i5000k3f03o...@news.iphouse.com>,
>>> "Dan Goodman" <dsg...@iphouse.com> wrote:
>>>> Children are being gene-engineered, raised, and educated for
>>>> sanity.
>>>> What traits might be encouraged?
>>> Elimination of whatever it is that makes males go crazy at about
>>> sixteen and not recover until about 26--as reflected in crime
>>> rates, insurance rates, etc.
>> I'd see more than one option. If genetic engineering can be one off,
>> and characteristics are selected by parents, you'd get one set, but
>> if the state is doing the engineering, raising and engineering, then
>> there are several different models that might be moved toward. Who
>> defines sanity? Are bad dreams, the ability to slip into PTSD,
>> revulsion about talking physiology and medical detail while eating
>> sane? Should a sane citizen accept public announcements as truth
>> without question? Should there be some sort of icon or logo that
>> automatically tells video watchers the information they're about to
>> receive is true, and that countervailing information is information
>> terrorism?
> What I had in mind is different groups advancing different versions of
> sanity. Which might cause some conflicts.
That makes sense to me, and is where I was going. You could get deep agents who've been biologically tailored to blend in, suddenly develop a virulent and opposition specific disease at, say 35. They wouldn't have to enter any particular social circle, in fact it would be better if they went for maximum dispersion inside the opposing country, so the plague would kick already in spread out to it's furthest geophysical reach.
I know that isn't a sanity issue, but simply a possible genetic engineering outcome. But you could bounce it up to the planners. What sort of mindset goes through with creating a "normal" member of a society who will one day spread deadly contagion, never knowing that she was designed that way?
With truly effective design, you could get a culture of human shaped killer wasps who take over other cultures and breed true, you could get a culture of true libertarians who agree on what that is, and will drive out anybody who tries to gain a mass consensus on any subject that the libertarian group disapproves of. You could see cultures of people who've built genetic markers in themselves to force them to breed true to their favored racial markers.
Some groups would attempt to develop genetic predisposition to martyrdom for a particular vision of God/Allah/Yahweh. Others might find it easier to make everybody genetically loyal to their Savior here on Earth.
Genetically enhanced asteroid miners, love the solitude, don't breath much except when motion is called for, make a pilgrimage to earth two or three times in their lives. They love it here for the tourism/sexual stimulation, but are made island crazy within a couple weeks. A utopia in which everybody is designed to love a certain job, and the only controversy is in how to design people with unique specializations who nonetheless share a strand of common humanity and loyalty to the larger human hive.
In article <c8ydnVE9TfeupgjNnZ2dnUVZ_jCdn...@posted.mtasolutions>,
Bill Swears <wswe...@gci.net> wrote:
Heinlein, of course, has been there already--with a throwaway line in _Starship Troopers_ on the failed attempt to breed aggression out of the human race.
David Friedman wrote:
> In article <c8ydnVE9TfeupgjNnZ2dnUVZ_jCdn...@posted.mtasolutions>,
> Bill Swears <wswe...@gci.net> wrote:
> Heinlein, of course, has been there already--with a throwaway line in > _Starship Troopers_ on the failed attempt to breed aggression out of
> the human race.
And somewhat earlier, in _Beyond This Horizon_.
-- Dan Goodman
Whatever you wish for me, may you have twice as much.
In article <xn0i55dusd4v7a...@news.iphouse.com>,
"Dan Goodman" <dsg...@iphouse.com> wrote:
> David Friedman wrote:
> > In article <c8ydnVE9TfeupgjNnZ2dnUVZ_jCdn...@posted.mtasolutions>,
> > Bill Swears <wswe...@gci.net> wrote:
> > Heinlein, of course, has been there already--with a throwaway line in > > _Starship Troopers_ on the failed attempt to breed aggression out of
> > the human race.
> And somewhat earlier, in _Beyond This Horizon_.
Except that that didn't involve any centralized attempt to produce a specific result, at least as I remember. It was what I think of as libertarian eugenics--a technology that let each couple choose, among the children they could have, which one they did have.
Bill Swears wrote:
> With truly effective design, you could get a culture of human shaped
> killer wasps who take over other cultures and breed true, you could
> get a culture of true libertarians who agree on what that is, and
> will drive out anybody who tries to gain a mass consensus on any
> subject that the libertarian group disapproves of.
Or it might turn out that people bred to be libertarians will mostly
reject libertarianism. Hey, if it's easy and instinctive, it can't be
The Right Thing....
-- Dan Goodman
Whatever you wish for me, may you have twice as much.
David Friedman wrote:
> In article <xn0i55dusd4v7a...@news.iphouse.com>,
> "Dan Goodman" <dsg...@iphouse.com> wrote:
> > David Friedman wrote:
> > > In article <c8ydnVE9TfeupgjNnZ2dnUVZ_jCdn...@posted.mtasolutions>,
> > > Bill Swears <wswe...@gci.net> wrote:
> > > Heinlein, of course, has been there already--with a throwaway
> > > line in _Starship Troopers_ on the failed attempt to breed
> > > aggression out of the human race.
> > And somewhat earlier, in _Beyond This Horizon_.
> Except that that didn't involve any centralized attempt to produce a > specific result, at least as I remember. It was what I think of as > libertarian eugenics--a technology that let each couple choose, among > the children they could have, which one they did have.
> Or am I forgetting a different part of the story?
It was backstory. Aggression had almost been bred out of
Americans/North Americans before the aggressive minority revolted.
And, of course, won.
-- Dan Goodman
Whatever you wish for me, may you have twice as much.
Dan Goodman <dsg...@iphouse.com> wrote:
> Children are being gene-engineered, raised, and educated for sanity.
> What traits might be encouraged?
Dullness. A few studies have suggested that insanity and intelligence
are inextricably linked. To make the human race sane, you're gonna have to
make them stupid as well.
... ... Remus Shepherd <re...@panix.com>
New Webcomic: Genocide Man http://www.genocideman.com/ Life is funny. Death is funnier. Mass slaughter can be hilarious.
> Dan Goodman <dsg...@iphouse.com> wrote:
>> Children are being gene-engineered, raised, and educated for sanity.
>> What traits might be encouraged?
> Dullness. A few studies have suggested that insanity and intelligence
> are inextricably linked. To make the human race sane, you're gonna have to
> make them stupid as well.
Your contention is premised on the idea that the genetic engineering is limited to altering balances that exist, rather than creating new mechanisms. Maybe the genetic design work will turn us into Vulcans, and the education will be oriented on making us more spontaneous so that the population doesn't crash because the kids are all Sheldon Cooperish.
Remus Shepherd wrote:
> Dan Goodman <dsg...@iphouse.com> wrote:
> > Children are being gene-engineered, raised, and educated for sanity.
> > What traits might be encouraged?
> Dullness. A few studies have suggested that insanity and
> intelligence are inextricably linked. To make the human race sane,
> you're gonna have to make them stupid as well.
I don't know of any studies which suggest a link between what IQ tests
measure and insanity.
There does seem to be a link between _creativity_ and insanity. But I
suspect this has more to do with a need to come up with workarounds for
coping with the world.
-- Dan Goodman
Whatever you wish for me, may you have twice as much.
"Dan Goodman" <dsg...@iphouse.com> writes:
> Children are being gene-engineered, raised, and educated for sanity.
> What traits might be encouraged?
Lots of things that sound good in principle and probably *are*, but will
be hell for actual parents to cope with in actual children --
independence, critical thinking, lack of respect for authority,
skepticism. -- Googleproofaddress(account:dd-b provider:dd-b domain:net)
Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/ Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/ Dragaera: http://dragaera.info
David Friedman <d...@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com> writes:
> In article <xn0i5000k3f03o...@news.iphouse.com>,
> "Dan Goodman" <dsg...@iphouse.com> wrote:
>> Children are being gene-engineered, raised, and educated for sanity.
>> What traits might be encouraged?
> Elimination of whatever it is that makes males go crazy at about sixteen > and not recover until about 26--as reflected in crime rates, insurance > rates, etc.
> > Children are being gene-engineered, raised, and educated for sanity.
> > What traits might be encouraged?
> Lots of things that sound good in principle and probably *are*, but will
> be hell for actual parents to cope with in actual children --
> independence, critical thinking, lack of respect for authority,
> skepticism.
While other parents will encourage them.
So the net result is a wider spread of those heritable traits that some parents approve of and some disapprove of, a narrower spread of those where almost all parents agree.
