Uh... why would the government have to force people to fulfill "the tasks they were designed for" (which is really a lot more targeted than is likely to ever be needed, versatility is a boon in most fields)?
Do you think there's going to be a shortage of these people? That we would need to force them into things? If there IS, and they are good at what they do, they'll be a ton of demand, and they'll be able to pick and choose. And there's nothing saying they have to choose a job in what they've been optimized for - most people don't do their optimal job. For the sorts of jobs that we would WANT to optimize people for, aka jobs we can't automate or we can't optimize existing people for mechanically, the sort of skills they'd need to be able to easily develop are exactly the sort of skills that would be able to give them power over their own lives, probably far more than most of us have right now, where it's work a dead-end job in the big-box-retail-store or our children starve, because we can't figure out another way out.
Cript, your suppositions are frankly ridiculous. Please, spell out to me a /single/ scenario where we would ever WANT to make someone so constrained they were incapable of anything other than some specific task.
I mean, the sort of stuff you guys are saying... it's nonsense. There's no incentives for that sort of development, except to the extent that all that exact same shit already happens. You're trying to say that giving people another /excuse/ will actually change that?
Let's take a hypothetical example, and say we've been working on a group of every smart, versatile, managerial types with a tendency to be more truthful than average. This is sort of the "ideal employee" for a great many automation-resistant positions. Hell, let's even say we design him so that he ENJOYS working, and doesn't really find most of the time wasters we engage in enjoyable, and he's got a constitution that lets him squeeze every ounce of enjoyment out of his job by working long hours and enjoying the work. Not too much, though, obviously - an ideal employee takes care of themselves so they can continue to grow their skills and knowledge and stay sharp.
Would this truly be that bad? Would this group become "slaves"? If anything, I'd imagine they'd be more likely to end up in charge.
The only risk I can possible see, insane and absurd hypotheticals aside, is the risk of "normal people" eventually being displaced from jobs they want by those better suited for them.
And you know what? That's life. That's how it works right this instant. The only thing that changes is that these people are doing /better/ - so stuff ends up cheaper, better decisions are made, etc. and so on. Is this something we should be afraid of?
Author
Topic: Eugenics (Read 17174 times)