> > > Geez. You'd think that after millions of years of evolution that there would be more than one smart person per classroom. So much for darwinism.
> > >
> >
> > Yeah...speaking of stupid and weak people, Darwin's evolution wouldn't be working it's magic on the human race anymore because stupid people and weak people are still mating and spawning more stupid and weak people. In fact, a stupid person may mate more than your average smart person. So, basically, shouldn't we be turning into a race of stupid and weak people? ummm...did I just steal that idea from H.G. Wells?
>
> Actually, that idea doesn't even require the whole evolutionary theory -- just the principle of natural selection (which I can embrace without reservation). I've frequently considered how modern medicine has in some small ways countered the positive effects of natural selection on the human gene pool.
>
> For example, someone like myself, who can't see three inches past his own nose without contact lenses, would have had zero chance of surviving -- much less marrying and producing offspring -- in the pre-glasses era. Nowadays, I and millions of others like me are free to contribute horrible vision to our posterity. Same goes for genetic susceptibility to ailments that are now treatable but would have been debilitating a few centuries ago.
>
> By helping genetically "inferior" people like myself to survive and reproduce, modern medicine causes the human gene pool (in Western nations more than others, I guess) to produce "inferiors" in greater numbers. So over a great amount of time, the human gene pool worsens.
>
> If this process went on unchecked, I could see it becoming a problem in the distant future. But it seems most likely that the next great wave of medical advances, in which we learn how to manipulate individual people on a genetic level, will serve to counteract the effect. Whatever ethical, religious and other problems genetic manipulation will present, it at least stands to reposition medicine as a cure for bad genes rather than a crutch for them.

What I find exciting is the prospect that we could potentially, in the future, remove disease-gene loci from the human genome (DNA). A great many diseases can be traced back to defective gene loci. We know that there are people who were probably *born* with tendancies to sociopathic behavior (because of cognitive deficits in the brain that don't allow them to feel guilt for doing evil). One day we might be able to cure sick minds before they are born, via genetic surgery. Of course, the question then must be asked "What are the ramifications to Free Will in that case?"


> Maybe no contact lenses or corrective surgery will be needed by the grandchildren of my wife and I, who are both blind as bats.
>
> Iss "...and don't tell me that bats aren't blind. I know that!" achar

Hey... my sister tells me that each diopter of correction in a eye prescription corresponds to 0.3 millimeters of displacement from "normal" eyeball curvature. That means if you have a prescription of -9, say, your eyeballs are a mere 2.7 mm out of whack. Imagine... such a small fraction: 2.7 MILLIMETERS producing such a huge fuzzy blurry distortion -- and for all practical purposes making the myopic/hyperoptic victim effectively "blind" in everyday life. Ack!

Wolfspirit