^ I am not going to entertain the rest of your post, as it detracts from the human philosophies debate at hand.
None of the above deviates from human philosophies. I understand that mediocrity has poisoned your mind, but I prefer discussion with sentient individuals.
Did... you apply an ounce of awareness before stating this?
I do understand where you are coming from, but these discussions are better understood face to face, rather than typing a mountain of text to convey a single idea of survival based on a few recycled philosophies.
The discussion is irrelevant to the mechanics. Obey them or you are history.
What is subjectivity and Objectivity then? If I look at it from an objective perceptive all realities and experiences are subjective, Objective reality doesn't exist at all. No one can ever be truly objective, that much is a factor of certainty. Survival is also a subjective stance rather than an objective matter; it hinges upon choices if anything else.
Objectivity does exist in events and the factors that influence them. Attempts to isolate the factors and their influence is what is called science. We can, later, after building theories (which are subjective interpretation of objective events), manipulate and utilize these factors to create what we call Engineering. Proper theory and implementation allows us to engineer the world around us to behave in ways we want it to.
If select few choose to procreate - bringing the best of the best from the select race
This is where you don't understand.
There is no such thing as "best."
Do you know why, as humans migrated from Africa, genetic adaptations that reduced the melanin in the skin (or changed it - Asians and Caucasians have two completely different genetic pathways to a similar effect)? Because at the higher latitudes, vitamin D production falls off considerably - particularly when you spend your time covered in clothing (necessary for our survival in the northern latitudes). Those with lighter skin had a statistical advantage in the higher latitudes compared to those with darker skin.
At the same time, sickle-cell anemia is an adaptation to deal with Malaria. The blood cells, though less effective at carrying oxygen, are much more difficult to block from circulating. This means that, in areas where high percentages of the population are infected with malaria - those with sickle-cell have an adaptation that grants them an edge in survival. Even though it is NOT an advantageous adaptation outside of highly infected areas.
Selective factors are nearly impossible to predict or control. We are always under the influence of various forms of selection (even self-imposed; our intelligence originated from women's selection of intelligent/interesting male counterparts... as a side-effect, women were driven to stealth-ovulation to deal with the consequences of increasing intelligence, now fueled by adultery and inheritance politics that were becoming increasingly complex from the simple behavior seen in other animals).
- from a group/clan/race that carry the philosophies of liberalism and open-mindedness, surely some change can be brought into the world through this.
Liberalism and open-mindedness are not equivocal.
Further - change has already been brought into the world because of this philosophy. The average size of the human brain has been shrinking and there is speculation that the human mind is becoming increasingly selective about what it is capable of learning.
Tens of thousands of years with compact, populous societies have reduced the need for individuals to have broad yet detailed mastery of topics - and they now only need to focus on a few details. Worse, rather than choosing to be part of society out of conscious recognition of its advantages in avoiding more risky (if more rewarding) personal exploits and endeavors. No more is this more apparent than in the employee's obsession that has infected this nation: "I need someone to give me a job."
The average person grows increasingly reliant upon instruction with each passing generation. "You need to do this, now." "You need to do that, now." We are slowly being bred into a hive-mind... or worse - soul-less servants and task-drones.
At least the individuals within a hive-mind carry out functions to sustain the colony on instinct... they don't really need to be told to do it - it's just how the 'individual' exists.
The fact that you think that killing and survival are somehow a necessity, and programmed into our genetic code than these are also general genetic reactions brought about by an explosion in population.
You don't really understand what I was saying, at all.
One can still make a decent living off of predatory behavior, and always will. Predatory behavior takes many forms - from title and pay-day loans to rapists and murderers. Exactly what natural and environmental factors contribute to their selection of predatory behavior is irrelevant to the fact that it is a perfectly valid means of survival.
This is where you are part of the hive-mind and I am an individual consciously choosing the advantages of society. You see it as "there is a reason for police."
I see it as: "There are people out there who will do me harm."
The police can only be reasonably expected to respond after someone has already chosen to commit predatory behavior - meaning there is already a victim (at least an imminant one).
Society can tolerate the loss of a few individuals, so long as their loss triggers a reaction against the force that caused the loss (and prevents future loss from that same source). I can't realistically survive by simply shooting up the local stores and taking what I need - because police will eventually respond to that behavior and put an end to it (and me). If a few children die or a few adults die - it's little consequence to society so long as the behavior was stopped.
If I happen to be such a victim, though, it's of great consequence to me. I refuse to be merely a trip-wire for the hive-mind.
Population control needs to be practiced. Not everyone should be allowed to procreate and create more chaos in regards to general economical imbalance which is creating or making crime rates in general sky rocket.
If you mean by fire-bombing the ghettos and crime-ridden trailer parks. Then I suppose we're on the same page.
Otherwise, while I sound like a 'eugenecist' - I'm not at all for forced systems of eugenics. Mostly for ethical reasons, but also because - like I said - we never know what factors are going to crop up to influence selection. Constrictive eugenic programs limit the genetic variation amongst populations and make them more suceptible to being wiped out by particularly infectious diseases, environmental changes, or other flaws.
