[ExI] Gene drift

[SR Ballard]

I’m not in any position at the moment to have children, but mostly, even if I were, I likely would not have biological children. It’s not related to the IQ bit, but more the metal health bit. I would feel terrible knowing that I chose to have a child when I knew would suffer unimaginable emotional pain, just because of my own selfish desires. 

That said, if I were, by some miracle to become married. I believe I would raise (adopt) children. 

Or if gene editing were more developed at that point, I would be willing as well. 

That being said, I’m not sure I have the right temperament for motherhood. But that’s another discussion altogether.

SR Ballard

> On Nov 14, 2018, at 12:55 PM, Stuart LaForge <avant at sollegro.com> wrote:
> 
> Tara Maya wrote:
> 
>> Having children invests your interest in a human future. Having no
>> children means you don’t care if you destroy that future. That’s motive.
> 
> While I agree that it would be of benefit for mankind if smart people
> bred, with or without the Singularity, I don't think it is fair to
> characterize those who choose not to have children as misanthropes.
> 
>> Brains gives you the means, and all that remains is opportunity to come
>> along to invest in a future which is very hostile to human well-being.
> 
> A psychopath is a psychopath, with or without children. Plenty of
> psychopathic children have killed the parents and vice versa. The vast
> majority of people without children, smart or not, are not psychopaths.
> People without children still share a lot of genes with the rest of
> humanity not to mention extended family like nieces and nephews.
> 
> Crazy is what crazy does but I fail to see any rational upside to
> destroying the human race ESPECIALLY if one does not have children.
> Whereas if one does have children one could rationalize genocide as
> clearing the field for ones children.
> 
>> 
>> I don’t trust politicians with no children, especially. And if a
>> roboticist with no children started praising some AI, I would be very
>> suspicious. Why should I trust that he wants the kind of future in which
>> my children can thrive?
> 
> Assuming the roboticist is a man, how do you know that he is is not just
> shy and awkward around women because of his small penis. How do you know
> he doesn't have people in his life that he loves who might have children
> of their own?
> 
> Neither Isaac Newton or George Washington ever fathered any children and
> neither of them turned out to be monsters.
> 
>> He has zero stake in it. It’s even worse if his
>> biological urge to protect the next generation has been usurped by a
>> robot parasite.
> 
> That parasite better be one damn cute and charming robot because he shares
> more genes with complete strangers than he does with the robot. But that
> does sound like the premise for a good story. ;-)
> 
> Stuart LaForge
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat