Quote from: 4v4l0n42 on September 07, 2011, 01:05:28 PM

I don't see how that is presented in a normative manner. It describes well established facts about human survival and human flourishing.

Obviously, as long as it defines what is normal. What is healthy? What is rational? You claim to know these. Two conditions in which I am willing to decide what someone needs regardless of their wants is when they are unable to communicate what they want (e.g. animals) or I am responsible of imposing my will over them (e.g. parenting). And both can sometimes be mildly arrogant.

Never mind the fact that a model can only be considered a fact only in proper context.

Quote from: 4v4l0n42 on September 07, 2011, 01:05:28 PM

No, it's a completely different fallacy. What you describe is eugenics, a pseudoscience that has nothing to do with serious debate about BPS or any other model from which to start, and it's completely decoupled from reality.

How is eugenics decoupled from reality? It's a fact that eliminating the weak from the gene pool will result in a healthier population. There is nothing unscientific about that. I think it's the same two fallacies. (1) You can't actually know what healthy is, and (2) you don't know enough about how it all works. You don't know which traits are desirable and which are not, and even if you claim to identify some as undesirable (maybe you gather it from living people who have those traits), you can't put weights on them to foresee what will happen if that person enters the gene pool.

Suppose you claim to have the perfect individuals according to a particular model and the technology to perfectly clone them. And you know that with sexual reproduction, it would take billions of people, millions of whom will suffer from disease before any positive trait is introduced to the population, would you take that risk? What would the RBE movement do?

Quote from: 4v4l0n42 on September 07, 2011, 01:05:28 PM

No scientific evidence?
Among many, I suggest you this reading:

"General Systems Theory: Problems, Perspectives and Practice" By Lars Skyttner - Reprinted in 2005
http://www.amazon.com/General-Systems-Theory-Problems-Perspectives/dp/9812564675

Thanks, I have enough recommended readings as it is, maybe I'll check it out later.

But as it stands, I'm highly sceptical about what the movement itself can achieve.

Quote from: 4v4l0n42 on September 07, 2011, 01:05:28 PM

As for the transition plan, there are many documents, videos, conferences and radio shows outlining how that may be achieved, and it's a continuos work in progress.

And I respect that. We almost share the same motives. Though if you don't trust people enough to control an unrestricted free market to act for the betterment of mankind, how do you suppose the same people to voluntarily work for that in a collective? I think it requires exactly the same intellectual achievement for the individuals.