Slowly erased from the Earth?
If a biological mechanism for eradicating humans with low intelligence becomes available in the future and it is painless and (works bypreventing such humans from having children) then is there any valid reason why it should not be implemented to
A) reduce the worlds population and conserve natural resources
B) allow a more intelligent human race to flourish on earth
I suggest moving this to great debates.
Do you know who else tried to do something like this?
I suggest you open a book on the history of eugenics.
Spoiler alert: It doesn’t end well.
It’s a great idea. There will only be a dozen or so humans left, great for all the other living things.
I would much rather just get rid of assholes like you. IQ does not define the quality of a human being.
Then we can exterminate the gingers!
This has already been happening for millions of years, and will continue to happen regardless of what we do. How do you think we got to be so smart in the first place? The mechanism is that stupid people do stupid things that get themselves killed.
Humans with low IQs are already being erased, though it’s mostly by attrition rather than good old-fashioned murder. See Flynn effect.
Finally, someone with a well thought out plan. Must be the IQ.
(I know this thread is going to rocket out of GQ any second now)
The mechanism is that whatever helps somebody make it to reproductive age and crank kids out will be selected for. Intelligence in the sense of “can use tools better than crows or apes, doesn’t pee on the electric fence twice, etc” helps. But I’m not aware of any evidence that intelligence in the sense of “a 110 on an IQ test rather than a 90” makes a difference. Got any recommended reading?
I guess we could, but Facebook’s going to take a huge hit.
Since this board is full of “the smartest, hippest people on the planet” I think we can all agree that anyone with an IQ less than 140 should be sterilized.
Moderator Action
Definitely not a factual question. Let’s give this a shot in GD.
Moving thread from General Questions to Great Debates.
Never let it be said that Drunky Smurf would never sacrifice himself for the good of all humanity. What a guy! 
Those of below average intelligence have a roll in our society. I’ll leave examples to the readers imagination, but somebody has to do this kind of work … and the dumber the better.
I can’t agree that low IQ is selected against by evolution, at least not in humans. Highly intelligent–or at least high-achieving–women tend to have fewer it no children, partly because they are pickier about whom they couple with, partly because they tend to put off having children till their thirties, partly because they are more likely that simply decide not to.
No. Leaving aside the fact that IQ doesn’t equate to intelligence but is a measure of how well someone takes a vertical set of tests I think this would be a bad idea and open to huge slippery slopes. Even without that, it’s unclear to me that this would somehow make the human population either better or smarter.
A is going to happen anyway, as the worlds population peaks and then starts to drop fairly dramatically IIRC after 2050 or 2075. Affluence and quality of life are going to do far more for dropping worlds population than some nebulous plan to weed out the supposed stupid people. As for B, I’m unconvinced that going by IQ would have that effect since you have to understand what it is that IQ actually measures and how intelligence actually works across the spectrum of humans. Some humans have very vertical intelligences, being VERY smart in some one or two vertical categories while having very limited abilities in others, while some humans have more horizontal capabilities, being not so high in any but good across the board. We kind of need both kinds. And this doesn’t even get into the possibilities of abuse of any system purporting to weed out the ‘low IQ’ folks.
I am not so sure. That movie “idiocracy” seems to me less satire and more documentary, especially as I watch the current election cycle.
our current society may be selecting for stupid people who will tend to be less diligent about contraception than their smarter brethren who will have fewer kids, later in life to better provide for them.
Stupid people will outbreed us, and let’s face it, there just aren’t enough sabre toothed tigers around, and we put fences on the high places, so the opportunity for the stupid to take one for the gene pool, isn’t what it used to be.
Eugenics, Ewww boy. Just because Hitler thought it was a great idea doesn’t make it a bad one, and it seems that one way or another we are performing eugenics on ourselves. Maybe, for the sake of argument we should explore it.
Here’s the problem: You want to eliminate stupid people, right? Define stupid. Are we talking about IQ? What exactly does that measure? Are we talking about common sense? Emotional intelligence? Spatial relations? Empathy?
All these things are really subjective, and what that means is that whoever is charge of the eugenics program is most likely to create a master race based on their personal prejudices and not on any quantifiable criteria.
So no, let the stupid people do what they want to do. In the end they may be marker than we think.