Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2024 Poal.co

686

A religion with high standards for members is effectively doing evolutionary selection for its group based on these standards. Most religions encourage in-group breeding. Good religions encourage monogamy which is eugenic and discourage promiscuity which is dysgenic. Monogamy selects for responsible parenting while promiscuity selects for immoral behavior through Fisherian selection. I wrote a long post about these ideas here:

http://www.mikraite.org/Human-Evolution-tp17.html

Religion is the only practical solution. Political solutions are simply not practical. But a small group of people could form a eugenic religion.

A religion with high standards for members is effectively doing evolutionary selection for its group based on these standards. Most religions encourage in-group breeding. Good religions encourage monogamy which is eugenic and discourage promiscuity which is dysgenic. Monogamy selects for responsible parenting while promiscuity selects for immoral behavior through Fisherian selection. I wrote a long post about these ideas here: http://www.mikraite.org/Human-Evolution-tp17.html Religion is the only practical solution. Political solutions are simply not practical. But a small group of people could form a eugenic religion.

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (28).
[–] [deleted] • 1 pt

Cults maybe. Most organized religions aren't that selective these days. Mixed race dating is not discouraged, It needs to be since churce is one place that truth should be taught. Those fuckers even say open faggotry is okay. I say keep it in the closet and we're good.

[–] • 0 pt

I don't care about race. Give me the best 100 people of every race and I will breed a population far superior to any existing race.

But yes, existing religions aren't selective enough. I am suggesting a theoretical religion. To be honest, I don't think this can be done right now, maybe in the future. This is my current plan (old.reddit.com) which I should post about separately.

[–] [deleted] • 1 pt

How about just "give me the best 100 people", ignoring race. If you're looking for the best, race really should not be an issue, except it will be with IQ disparity. Unless, you consider NBA players are some of "the best".

[–] • 0 pt

Absolutely. Give me the best regardless of race. That is the ideal.

[–] • 1 pt

Give me the best 100 people of every race and I will breed a population far superior to any existing race.

You might if you're going off the theory that more genetic diversity is always good. Hybrid vigor, etc.

But then again different racial groups have differing average IQs, and the offspring of different races tend toward the average of the average of each parents' group.

So if you crossed a white (avg IQ 100) and an American black (Avg IQ 80 or so), you're looking at a child with a probable IQ around 90. So admixing is a great deal for the low IQ races, not so much for the average or high IQ racial group partner. (Which is probably why it's resisted by those groups).

It's also worth noting that genetic diversification is not 100% benefit. While you are reducing the likelihood of harmful recessive gene pairings, you are also reducing the likelihood of beneficial co-adaptive gene pairings.

[–] • 0 pt

You don't seem understand what I am saying. I said the BEST of each race. This has nothing to do with genetic diversity and everything to do with seeking quality. The average member of every race is a worthless moron.

I have hired many programmers in my career based on intelligence. The only group that lacks high intelligence is women. I have hired intelligent men of all races.