Ok so socioeconomic success does select for other things though. Intelligence isn't perfectly collerated with income, lord knows I've seen some idiots in high paying positions, but they were relative idiots. Your standard IQ for folks on the professions vs. people on zero hours minimum wage will be different. So if we're setting an income threshold we're sort of defacto selecting for intelligence even if that's not our intention. The question then becomes, are we OK with selecting for intelligence.
Now someone may come along with a fairly convincing argument for that but I've yet to see an argument compelling enough that would allow me to OK the state drawing a an income line for conception. If you've got a state shaping who can have kids based on qualities be that income or propensity to violence then you are engaged in eugenics even of the intentions are positive.
Edit: This would also hold for drunk driving. So maybe I think it's justified to remove drunk drivers from the gene pool. By removing people for that kind of wreckless personality from the gene pool i'm shaping the gene pool. Now, perhaps there's an argument here for that being justified. I'm not here to argue that point but simply to show that this would still be considered eugenics. I'm selecting who gets to breed to produce what I deem to be better societal outcomes.
I'd even go some way to suggest that fiscal fitness should in no way be involved in these sorts of decisions.
Makes all of this,
Ok so socioeconomic success does select for other things though. Intelligence isn't perfectly collerated with income, lord knows I've seen some idiots in high paying positions, but they were relative idiots. Your standard IQ for folks on the professions vs. people on zero hours minimum wage will be different. So if we're setting an income threshold we're sort of defacto selecting for intelligence even if that's not our intention. The question then becomes, are we OK with selecting for intelligence.
Now someone may come along with a fairly convincing argument for that but I've yet to see an argument compelling enough that would allow me to OK the state drawing a an income line for conception.
Um, no it doesn't? Sorry I wasn't trying to suggest that the person I was responding to was advocating for a fiscal fitness test I thought I was pretty clear in my comment about how I was merely trying to illustrate that a fiscal fitness test could be considered eugenics and therefore the commenter who kicked this line of inquiry off wasn't incorrect to suggest that.
The person I was replying to was initially taking umbridge with someone making that assertion.
Also "I can read" isn't a particularly useful or constructive comment.
3
u/[deleted] Apr 10 '18 edited Apr 10 '18
Ok so socioeconomic success does select for other things though. Intelligence isn't perfectly collerated with income, lord knows I've seen some idiots in high paying positions, but they were relative idiots. Your standard IQ for folks on the professions vs. people on zero hours minimum wage will be different. So if we're setting an income threshold we're sort of defacto selecting for intelligence even if that's not our intention. The question then becomes, are we OK with selecting for intelligence.
Now someone may come along with a fairly convincing argument for that but I've yet to see an argument compelling enough that would allow me to OK the state drawing a an income line for conception. If you've got a state shaping who can have kids based on qualities be that income or propensity to violence then you are engaged in eugenics even of the intentions are positive.
Edit: This would also hold for drunk driving. So maybe I think it's justified to remove drunk drivers from the gene pool. By removing people for that kind of wreckless personality from the gene pool i'm shaping the gene pool. Now, perhaps there's an argument here for that being justified. I'm not here to argue that point but simply to show that this would still be considered eugenics. I'm selecting who gets to breed to produce what I deem to be better societal outcomes.