Aspies For Freedom

I am not saying leave things unquestioned. I am saying I am not interested in your opinion of me, and your opinion of me is not contributing at all to the discussion. If anything it demonstrates your own lack of capacity to contribute to the discussion. Erkolos, in response to your point about propagating your genes, do you not think a great achievement such as the lightbulb will be a legacy that lasts much longer than your genetic material? Also do you not think you need to make an appraisal of your own genetic material as to quality?

And by the way, if I were to follow erkolos' advice the better move would not be to stop insulting people, but to freeze my eggs and pay someone else to use them on my death.

I agree that wasted intelligence is as bad as no intelligence. But if you dont have any intelligence, you can't use it, so having the intelligence in the first place is important.

As we have already acknowledged establishing someone's worth is a thing which is difficult to measure. All I have done is set out what I believe to be the assessment criteria. You do not know enough about me or what else I do in life to make a valid assessment of me. And I  am not interested in making an assessment of you. All I have said is that some people are better than others. Some people are worse than me,others are better. And I need a lot of information about them to establish which category they fall into.

By the way I am 19. And while we are on the subject of psychoanalysing one another. Maybe you will come up with something logical and coherant when you have  finished your emotional venting at me.

I fully intend to have my eggs screened before I use them.

That is not true. People are inferior if they are less intelligent, or make less of a contribution to society than I do, or have less potential to make such a contribution. In order to categorise them in the way you just did to me, I would need to know their intellectual capacity. You do not know my intellectual capacity. You do not know whether I have given any other human being any comfort or happiness. You do not know if or what charity work I have done. You do not know if I have written a book, or an article or thought of an idea no-one else has. You know none of those things about me. I have just said several times that I need to know those things in order to determine which category they go into.

All you know about me is my age my nationality, where I study and what I have written on this forum. That is all. If that is enough information for you to make an assessment, your system for assessing people must be grossly unjust.

I had the information that the individuals in question had sub normal intelligence and were unable to conduct themselves in a manner which allowed them to be educated. That was enough information. You have no idea how intelligent or otherwise I am. And you do not know me at all and it is presumptuous and inappropriate to say that I am not very bright.

By the way Tigger you admire Ian for knowing what he wants and making it happen. What makes you think I do not have those traits?

No I am not. You might be the UK's number one cancer research scientist for all I know. I am making a judgement about a class of people who fulfill the criteria 'net loss to society'. I am not attempting to go through them members of AFF and assess whether or not htey fall into that category. That would be a waste of my time. I am just challenging the assumption you all seem to have that human beings are deserving of equal respect.

Then you do have a system. Its called whether or not they hurt people. And my appalling behaviour is simply to point out a truth to you: some people are better than others. Why is that so difficult for you to accept?

I don't know. That is not enough information for me. You might tell me that in his spare time he is one of the Leading lights of World Vision. Or that he did an illuminating Dphil on Shakespeare at Cambridge when he was 23. To make a judgement of someone you need to know what their major achievements and major failures in life are. I am guilty, along with most of the population of making a snap decision about someone without really knowing much about them. Thats why you are allowed to change your opinion as the information you have about a person increases.

I disagree that it is a human rights abuse to do so. Just because intellectual contribution is difficult to assess justly does not mean that it is arbitrary. Why is how someone treats others any more important? I get more out of electricity, antibiotics, and painkillers than I ever could out of a kind word.

Because your genetics ARE you. They aren't a thing external to you tha is bestowed upon you like money or affection. Therefore you are saying in essence how can you say that your good fortune in being better makes you better than someone less fortunate?

Then what do you think of the situation where two people have the same opportunity and one makes more of it than the other?

People don't have time to do a background check on every individual they meet. They go with a first impression and they change it if people furnish them with other information. I don't see anything wrong with that. You can only work on the information you have available, even if it is not the whole picture and you sometimes get it wrong.

Genes are not a gift given to you. They are PART OF YOU. They are what make you better or worse than other individuals. And I look up to and down on people accordingly.