Society is changing every second; thus, society’s opinions on morals and ethics are changing every second, too. In the past, society believed and supported the ideas of eugenics and eugenicists. Today, however, eugenics is blamed for the racial and gender presumptions about genetics. Two well-known eugenicists are Lewis Terman and David Starr Jordan, who each contributed their ideas to further the movement of eugenics. Typically, schools are often named after people who have made positive contributions to society, and these two figures of eugenics have only demoralized certain races and genders. As a result, schools should not be named after these two people because the names illuminate ideas towards stereotypes and racism. While some may consider …show more content…
Lewis Terman’s convinced many school districts to use tests that implied stereotypical ideas. Terman implemented his biased ideas into the education system without hesitation. He, along with other psychologists, “successively convinced many school districts to use high-stakes and culturally-biased tests” (Stoskepf 3). This shows Terman basically convinced schools to determine student’s intellect by their race. Racism is an especially controversial issue, and during the time that Terman and Jordan were alive, most citizens were starting the fight against racism. However, eugenicists were going against the ideas of the commonwealth and dictating the new generation their intelligence level regardless of second thought. By doing so, society becomes less intelligent and more accepting of unjustifiable information without afterthought. This also creates an open belief of stereotypes throughout the United States. Thus, schools should not be labeled after these eugenicists because they reinforced derogatory ideas that civilians, in the present and past, try to overcome and get rid …show more content…
Besides their remarkable research on the field of eugenics, while David Starr Jordan still was the “Stanford president” along with also being “a peace activist” (wikipedia.com), Lewis Terman found out much information on “the best educational setting for gifted children” (wikipedia.com), tried to “dispel the negative stereotypes” of “gifted children, and conducted “innovative wide-scale IQ testing” (wikipedia.com). Without both of these scientists, human research wouldn’t be the same. They both had achievements that should be obligated to celebrate. However, this points fails to recognize that each of their achievements weren’t for the most moral reasons. Although Jordan was part of the founding community of Stanford and a peace activist, he was a peace activist because he felt “that war was detrimental to the human species because it removed the strongest organisms from the gene pool. This means that, even though he tried to spread his ideas of pacifism to people, he merely believed in pacifism for white supremacy. This means that he wasn’t a peace activist for a good cause, yet instead for racism and gratuitous assumptions. School, especially a university, should be a peaceful place where each and every student feels that they have the same learning opportunity
The eugenics movement started in the early 1900s and was adopted by doctors and the general public during the 1920s. The movement aimed to create a better society through the monitoring of genetic traits through selective heredity. Over time, eugenics took on two different views. Supporters of positive eugenics believed in promoting childbearing by a class who was “genetically superior.” On the contrary, proponents of negative eugenics tried to monitor society’s flaws through the sterilization of the “inferior.”
The American Eugenics Movement was led by Charles Davenport and was a social agenda to breed out undesirable traits with an aim of racial purification. Eugenics was a used to breed out the worst and weakest to improve the genetic composition of the human race, and advocated for selective breeding to achieve this. The science of eugenics rested on simple mendelian genetics, which was a mistake because they were assuming complex behaviors could be reduced to simple mendelian genes. After Nazi Germany adopted the ideas behind the American eugenics movement to promote the Aryan race, the eugenics movement was completely discredited.
Neoeugenics is the idea of new, “neo”, eugenics or a new way of creating a healthier race. Eugenics was first defined in the late 1800s by a man named Sir Francis Galton who said that it was basically the study of traits that will cause an advantage or disadvantage in the traits of future generations. Eugenics soon turned from being about the use of artificial selection of breeding to create a stronger species, to being about the advancement of certain races over others. When talking about neo eugenics, it is believed that it may turn into something similar to that of eugenics in that the use of artificial selection would now be used to bring the upper class higher in standards of health and wellbeing as well as beauty. Others believe that the use of neo eugenics will help create a healthier, more stable species. Whether bad or good, the way that eugenics will advance will be in designer babies.
Galton, David J., and Clare J. Galton. "Francis Galton: And Eugenics Today." Journal of Medical Ethics, 24.2 (1998): 99-101. JSTOR. Web. 8 Mar. 2010.
Dena Davis in the 5th chapter of “Genetic Dilemmas: Reproductive Technology, Parental Choices, and Children’s Futures” explores the global attitudes, policies, and morality towards determination of sex. She begins with presenting empirical evidence of some preferences held in countries such as India or China where there is a clear desire for male children. This inclination is so deeply held that mothers can be socially and physically harmed when, by pure biological chance, they fail to produce a male child. Davis and others allow sex selection in these cases, purely in the interest of harm reduction of mothers and their daughters born into such a situation. This example is contrasted with so-called “western” societies, where the preference
Eugenics has been an increasingly popular concept in recent films and texts. The presence of eugenics in these films and texts has caused people to believe that eugenics could be helpful in society. The idea that the perfect person can be created or modified is simply irrational. Each individual person’s qualities are created by their surroundings as they grow up. In Always With Us, Howard Horwitz wishes that the eugenics movement in the United States never had gathered steam. The negative aspects of eugenics that Horowitz discusses are noticeable in works such as Gattaca, A Brave New World, and The Blade Runner. The notion that eugenics is a positive for society limits individuals’ potential by predetermining what they can achieve. By predetermining
To choose for their children, the world’s wealthy class will soon have options such as tall, pretty, athletic, intelligent, blue eyes, and blonde hair. Occasionally referred to as similar to “the eugenics of Hitler’s Third Reich” (“Designer Babies” n.p.), the new genetics technology is causing differences in people’s opinions, despite altering DNA before implantation is “just around the corner.” (Thadani n.p.). A recent advance in genetically altering embryos coined “designer babies” produces controversy about the morality of this process.
The material analyzed by Alexandra Minna Stern circulates in the form of a book titled “Eugenics Nation: Faults and Frontiers of Better Breeding in Modern America,” that was originally published in November 2007. The book is chronologically sequenced in order to provide the reader with detailed accounts of social eugenic practices throughout different periods in America History. In her book, Stern seeks to examine the connection between eugenics and the emergence of environmental movements in the state of California through the life of key figures such as Fairfield Osborn, Jordan Goethe, and John C. Merriam. In addition, the author extrapolates how radically progressive changes in California went on to influence
The actual term ‘Eugenics’ was developed by Darwin’s cousin, Sir Francis Galton (1822-1911) and who is credited with coining the term ‘nurture vs. nature’ - the heart of what later came to be known as ‘scientific racism’ (Bradshaw). This was perhaps unsurprisingly a direct outworking of the ‘new’ Darwinian evolutionary philosophy prevalent at the time, and now widely held in society and academia.
The idea of eugenics was first introduced by Sir Francis Galton, who believed that the breeding of two wealthy and successful members of society would produce a child superior to that of two members of the lower class. This assumption was based on the idea that genes for success or particular excellence were present in our DNA, which is passed from parent to child. Despite the blatant lack of research, two men, Georges Vacher de Lapouge and Jon Alfred Mjoen, played to the white supremacists’ desires and claimed that white genes were inherently superior to other races, and with this base formed the first eugenics society. The American Eugenics Movement attempted to unethically obliterate the rising tide of lower classes by immorally mandating organized sterilization and race based experimentation.
Suffragists fought very hard for nearly a century to get the Nineteenth Amendment passed. Most people are aware of the great efforts by such suffragists as Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton, originating in the Seneca Falls Convention of 1848. However, what many people do not realize is the eugenic and racist ideas that the suffragists espoused. Why did the suffragists have these ideals, and where did they get them from? The sources discuss the suffragists’ motives in having these ideals, describe how these ideals advanced suffrage, and explain what larger implications this had in America both historically and politically.
The Web. 27 May 2014. The "Eugenics" - "The. Dictionary.com. The World of the. Dictionary.com, n.d. -. Web.
The term eugenics was coined in the late 19th century. Its goal was to apply the breeding practices and techniques used in plants and animals to human reproduction. Francis Galton stated in his Essays in Eugenics that he wished to influence "the useful classes" in society to put more of their DNA in the gene pool. The goal was to collect records of families who were successful by virtue of having three or more adult male children who have gain superior positions to their peers. His view on eugenics can best be summarized by the following passage:
The evolution of technology has been hand in hand with the human subjugation of earth, but the question persists, when does the use of technology go too far? Advances in medical science have increased the average human lifespan and improved the quality of life for individuals. Medical science and biology are steadily arriving at new ways to alter humans by the use of advanced genetic alteration. This technology gives rise to the question of how this new technology ought to be used, if at all. The idea of human enhancement is a very general topic, since humans are constantly “enhancing” themselves through the use of tools. In referring to human enhancement, I am referring specifically to the use of genetic intervention prior to birth. Julian Savulescu, in his, “Genetic Interventions and the Ethics of Enhancement of Human Beings,” argues that it is not only permissible to intervene genetically, but is a morally obligatory. In this paper, I will argue that it is not morally obligatory to intervene genetically even if such intervention may be permissible under certain criteria. I will show, in contrast to Savulescu’s view, that the moral obligation to intervene is not the same as the moral obligation to prevent and treat disease. In short, I will show that the ability of humans to intervene genetically is not sufficient to establish a moral obligation.
The study of eugenics has been around for many years. China runs the largest and most successful eugenics program in the world. This is becoming more common and accepted by many people. However, simply because it is accepted does not make it right. Eugenics comes from the Greek word meaning “good” or “well born”. It is the belief that some people are genetically superior to others; and that one inherits their relatives’ mental and psychological traits. Eugenics started off as a positive theory, encouraging educated people (positive eugenics) to bear more children and raise them in a constructive manner, but has become a negative theory threatening the sterilization of people with unwanted traits (negative eugenics).