Why the DNA machine is a good thing.

Why the DNA machine is a good thing.

aposha wrote:

In fact, it follows the usual narrative that humanity or the world as it is is flawed and must be improved or, more properly, corrected to conform with how some fucktard thinks it ought to be.... thereby exposing his own nihilistic dissatisfaction with existence, his hatred of reality and his refusal or inability to adapt himself to it.

You cannot change what has been bred. Would you expect a chipmunk to behave as a chimpanzee? Would you expect a chimpanzee to behave as a man? It is the modern mentality to be whatever you want to be, whatever you can be. It is the modern man who wishes to bend nature to his whims, to eradicate all trees, to subjugate all non-civilized lifeforms, to create what he calls his "utopia", which is actually a meglomaniacal, mechanical monstrocity of the highest order. This calls for him to bend nature to his whims. But does not the Satyrian man, in his quest to adapt to the nature around him, also call for nature to bend to his whims...his inner nature? Causing him to reject and bend some of the natural things about himself in order to better accommodate the outer, external nature and pressures around him? So this too, the Satyrian and modern, share the same trait of bending their own inner natures, molding themselves to what they feel they ought to be, bending their own natures to satisfy the external nature around them. Satyrians and moderns both bend their own inner natures, casually and according to outside circumstances. The difference is that moderns tend to bend natures based on the human whims around them, and the preferences of the lesser dimwits, while Satyrians bend themselves according to higher ideals, real physical nature, and the most probable outcomes, and the preferences of higher aesthetics, not lesser dimwits. The other major difference between the two is that Moderns have an unhealthy obsession with modifying external environments, rejection of both internal and external Nature and habits, and habitats, such as habitat destruction, and control and oppression of lifeforms who do not conform to their rules and ideals.
So when a man calls for the assassination of all Rockefellers I view him as one would view a child. Though a modern is very adept at modifying and destroying the external nature and world around him, he is not so skilled at truly modifying core inner natures, though with TV, music, brainwashing, and bad breeding he is becoming better at it, truly brainwashing organisms to enjoy their life as wage slaves, toxic food, sterile habitats and enjoying the mediocre art and culture he provides to them. However, the other modern, the saintly type of modern, who believes in the good will of individuals, is futile in his attempts to change the world. This kind of modern believes that if you remove all the bad guys, good will prevail. A man who believes that killing all politicians will save the world. This type of man is limited in thinking. He plays life as a chess game, a game where he thinks only one or two moves ahead.  It gives him comfort to think of things this way. He thinks about his glory days as a Spartan, ridding the world of all bad people, then he takes a rest and stops thinking about it. For him, this is the end of the movie, a happy ending. He sees a happy utopia at the end of the film. The bad guys are gone, the world is saved. The end. He doesn't think of the next step. The next step is that more brainwashed slaves will step in to take their place. The next step is that more babies will be born. If not slaves, robots. If not robots, aliens. You see you cannot damage an infrastructure, or cripple an institution, if the framework is still in place, if the framework is still populated by the same units. And the framework is the human mind itself. You see, there are a million more Rockefellers lying in wait, and a million more politicians waiting to be born, waiting to take their place, and a million more Jews, waiting to make new money and religions.
It doesn't matter if you are an atheist or believer. Micro-evolution is real. There are hereditary traits, that pass on to each generation. Smart people will usually breed smart people. Dumb people will usually breed dumb people. Natural selection and micro-evolution is a process that occurs today. Doesn't matter if the world is 6000 years old or 6 billion years old. There is still micro-evolution, and DNA traits are hereditary.
The process of evolution is a process towards greater pain and suffering. A bacteria does not feel pain. A small animal fears pain, but not enslavement. A human fears both pain and enslavement.(1) And a human has the sharpest consciousness in order to maximize his awareness of pain. Higher lifeforms experience more pain, as well as more empathy, and empathy provides an even greater proximity and network of possible pain. The path of evolution is to increase pain. So you can see why I view most forms of transhumanism as a rather bone-headed idea. I cannot take any man seriously who hopes for salvation in the form of uploading his consciousness into a computer device. Scientists understand so little about the nature of pain that they label pleasure in the brain as a vague and non-descript "pleasure centers of the brain" and euphoria as simply "nerve endings" and "balanced serotonin." With their incomplete knowledge of pain and pleasure, they have no business attempting to sustain consciousness in a machine. Would you let a nerd on the business end of a computer dictate your entire life essence? Let him decide if you should be happy or miserable? Let him torture you if he's having a bad day? Such a notion, uploading your mind into a computer, letting your life essence, pain and pleasure, be dictated by a nerd, surrendering your soul to the possibility of torment at the hands of a nerd, is surely a symptom of modern stupidity and the modern obsession with fantasy, surrendering yourself to a God who's man incarnate, and magical comfort thinking that they don't full think through.
I once said that pain is simply sharpness of sensation, acuity of consciousness, and that pleasure is simply mindlessness. Perhaps this is true. One may wonder then, why one would promote the advancement of lifeforms, why one would seek to upgrade DNA and form a being of higher intelligence, if higher intelligence means more misery. First and foremost, a concept you need to understand is lorem ipsum. Once you understand lorem ipsum you will understand why higher intelligence is needed. Even if higher intellect is painful, you will need to build a place I call Eden, a kind of Utopia. Once the Utopia is built, and secured, then the purpose of higher intelligence is no longer needed. Then you may enjoy the fruits of your labor, in ignorant bliss. Now you see the depth of my wisdom. Labor and build a utopia, labor and build your intelligence, secure it, make it safe, but it is not the final step. Many people take offense to the word utopia, as it has been slandered and misused over the years. The modern's idea of a utopia is a land filled with sterile cubicles, rules and regulations, safety over freedom. The average human's utopia is no Eden. The average human does not have the required intellect to create a utopia. This is why upgrading the human intelligence is essential, so that they actually know what a utopia is, and what they are building. You do not ask a child to build you the blueprints of a dream home. The thing about children is they are arrogant, and they are very confident that they can do it better than you can. This is dangerous mentality, and something to watch out for when treading amongst fellow sapiens. Be wary of children who overpower you with their loud mouths and tell you what "ought" to be done, how the world "ought" to be. Especially pay them no mind if their greatest fear is rape, they are surely an average modern, who uses their loud mouth and imposing aura to persuade. View them as you would a fellow kindergartner in preschool.
Though intelligence may increase pain, perhaps not so much pain as without intelligence. For example, it could follow a certain equation. It might be less painful to have a society of high intelligence, but with better standards, than a society with medium intelligence, but with low standards. For the quality of standards increase exponentially as a function of intelligence, but the amount of pain increases only linearly as the intelligence grows.
The other reason is that this is the path of evolution based on the physical world around us, comprised of rocks lava and minerals. The path of evolution in the physical, tangible world around us, may to be breed pain as a function of higher lifeforms. However, in a lab, it may be possible to construct a higher life form, which has higher intelligence without the higher pain, as well as empathy without anhedonia or psychopathy.
Some among us say that sapiens is the ultimate code, that it is the most balanced lifeform. But imagine a world where rap music was the norm, and everyone was a spawn of Nikki Minaj. They would believe themselves the highest lifeform, if they even knew what DNA was. They would say they were perfectly balanced, and could become no better. This is of course not true. I believe that the sapiens code is not the ultimate DNA code. I believe as different as we are from chipmunks, as different sapiens could be from the ultimate DNA code. Some believe that positive traits are limited by the negative, that one cannot have power without brutality, safety without slavery, empathy without psychopathy. I say nay, I believe we can have power without brutality, intellect without ennui, godliness without disgust. Maybe some day we will be so advanced, that there will an artist greater than Beethoven, so divine that we look upon the old Beethoven as one looks upon Nikki Minaj. Of course, only the advanced, most high of us could appreciate this new music.
In summation, the DNA machine is needed. There will always be more Rockefellers, more Chinamen, more politicians, if the gene pool remains the same. You cannot have it both ways, you cannot say to embrace nature, but yet expect a Rockefeller to reject his own greedy, capitalist nature, or expect a ghetto to reject their nature of having 12 babies while listening to rap music. What has been bred has been bred. You cannot save humanity through pamphlets, or reversing the brainwashing of entities who's nature is to create the brainwashing and degrade the world in the first place. If human nature is not changed, history will repeat itself endlessly. It is said not to change the nature around you but yourself around the world. Perhaps with the DNA machine we will breed a man so well that he will even enjoy sleeping in the rain.

(1). . This is why the establishment seeks to dumb down modern man, to lessen his fear mechanisms, and make him more accepting of enslavement.

Where is that quote from and what was I talking about at the time?

But I doubt that I was stating an absolute disapproval of all human improvement, or the practice of eugenics. I think the weak should be culled. I think the intelligent, healthy, strong should be given financial incentives to breed as much as possible, so that their fitness can spread and improve our species.
Within their own race, in order to raise and advance the existing qualities that they have inherited, and to eliminate the flaws. Because I value my genetic distinctiveness and I value those of my own race in whom I see myself. Because I am altruistic selectively, exclusively.
I want the past to move into the future as a higher type, to elevate itself, to create beyond itself. I want an increase in power, and the only way this can be achieved is to take what I have and build upon that. The past is a foundation, without it your edifice will crumble. You cannot become other than what you are, nor can you change beyond what your inherent potential restricts you to. You must use what tools you have to climb higher.

The concept that you can be whatever you want to be is an Americanism and completely disconnected from reality. But it feels good.
This same emotional-based view is probably what I was referring to in that quote. Something along the lines of communism where there is a perfect Ideal for society which unfortunately imperfect man cannot live up to.... therefore man must be changed to conform with the ideal.
It's the wrong way of looking at it. 20 million deaths are evidence of that.
The objective, the goal, the ideal, if you are to have one, must coincide with reality. You can't propose a system where everybody pools resources and ignore greed or laziness.
Reality must be known before it can be built upon. Know Thyself, the rest will follow.

I can't comment on the effects of DNA manipulation because I don't know what they would be in this context. Or aliens or any of the other nonsense.

Aliens was only a metaphor.

Modern = change world to accommodate him, and his chosen, preferred collective.
He prefers living in his head, or the collective mind, the hive mind, the inter-subjective relationships of compromises, politics.

Pagan = change self, adapt, in relation to world, not human world, but world before, outside, human interventions.
He rejects manmade environments as what he must adapt to, particularly those who compeltely contradict nature, as with Nihilistic ones.

apaosha wrote:

Where is that quote from and what was I talking about at the time?

But I doubt that I was stating an absolute disapproval of all human improvement, or the practice of eugenics. I think the weak should be culled. I think the intelligent, healthy, strong should be given financial incentives to breed as much as possible, so that their fitness can spread and improve our species.
Within their own race, in order to raise and advance the existing qualities that they have inherited, and to eliminate the flaws. Because I value my genetic distinctiveness and I value those of my own race in whom I see myself. Because I am altruistic selectively, exclusively.
I want the past to move into the future as a higher type, to elevate itself, to create beyond itself. I want an increase in power, and the only way this can be achieved is to take what I have and build upon that. The past is a foundation, without it your edifice will crumble. You cannot become other than what you are, nor can you change beyond what your inherent potential restricts you to. You must use what tools you have to climb higher.

The concept that you can be whatever you want to be is an Americanism and completely disconnected from reality. But it feels good.
This same emotional-based view is probably what I was referring to in that quote. Something along the lines of communism where there is a perfect Ideal for society which unfortunately imperfect man cannot live up to.... therefore man must be changed to conform with the ideal.
It's the wrong way of looking at it. 20 million deaths are evidence of that.
The objective, the goal, the ideal, if you are to have one, must coincide with reality. You can't propose a system where everybody pools resources and ignore greed or laziness.
Reality must be known before it can be built upon. Know Thyself, the rest will follow.

I can't comment on the effects of DNA manipulation because I don't know what they would be in this context. Or aliens or any of the other nonsense.

Since when has incentivizing, monetary utility, been the impetus of the healthy and intelligent, or what I'd call the creative.

Hrodeberto wrote:

Since when has incentivizing, monetary utility, been the impetus of the healthy and intelligent, or what I'd call the creative.

If you were undertaking a eugenics program, how would you ensure that the right people were breeding, through force?
Large families require financial support. The state can provide that. It can also pay undesirables to sterilize themselves, or just fine them if they have children. It depends how soft you want to be about it. What is desirable and undesirable is at the discretion of the state conducting the eugenics program; a variety of this is already in effect in the West, except the desired traits being bred for do not include health, intelligence or creativity.

The fact is, without naming names, healthy intelligent "creative" people typically have fewer children, late in life. Stupid people have many children, usually early on. This has to do with planning for the future and thinking about the consequences of actions. R/K selection and so forth.

Guranteed basic income, modified.
It doesn't appear that financial incentive is always the motivator. So then, incentives based on the nature of the potential recipient: e.g., if he or she were a scientist, then he could be apportioned the research material, setting, and funding for his interests.

As you prob. already know, National Socialist Germany had a variety of systems under which selected and selective individuals were tailored according to their talents or inclinations: for instance, types of women trained for familihood/motherhood.

Similarly young [qualified] couples are given an incentive to pursue higher education under the condition that they reproduce or start a family and in exchange they receive the obligation of all basic living or life amenities, like food and housing, transportation, healthcare, etc., on top of full coverage of all educational expenses, both formal and informal, and procurement of job placement or business start up assistance following completion of studies.
Currently there are policy implementations that touch on this, but the costs usually out weigh the benefits or are insignificant, like military service to accolades, or as when I was in university graduate students could apply for limited subsidized family housing.