Civgene is the theory that human beings are genetically two separate behavioral sets, psychopaths and empaths (non psychopaths.) Empaths are far more populous and their behavior is largely (if not entirely) responsible for civilization as we think of it. Anyone can bear a child who is a genetic psychopath. Psychopaths breed more quickly than non psychopaths (ignoring moral consequences allow psychopaths to have more children) with a higher likelyhood of bearing a psychopath. Their proportions grow, and eventually they collapse their civilization by collapsing trust based mechanisms, through corruption and graft.
This presents a technological problem for the modern world. Economic collapse or rapid simplification was a simple enough solution in the past. Suddenly economies could no longer support the psychopaths, and they died off reducing their portion of the population, with collateral damage. Like a fever in your body fights a flu. Now there are 400+ nuclear power plants which as Fukushima demonstrated, could rapidly destroy the planet. A fever so severe it kills the host. The key is they need constant attendance by educated workers, which will be difficult to maintain when the basic supplies no longer flow.
There is new hope. There are quite a few generation III+ nuclear power plants going up next year in 2017. While these do not hit the ideal target of one month unmanned operation, they can remain unmanned without power or supplies for 72 hours, and a skeleton crew can keep them operating indefinitely. A defining feature is the plants finally use natural forces like gravity and condensation, to circulate cooling water making meltdown far less likely. This is great news.
Generation III+ may be the good enough to survive an economic collapse in conjunction with some onsite family relocation and stockpiling of basic supplies for that key skeleton crew of workers, but that work is just beginning. The hundreds of existing plants need to be shut down and replaced ASAP. We need the global economy to survive until that work is complete. Unfortunately the economy is already collapsing in uncontrolled localization and simplification. Collapse is already in progress.
I suggest citizens consider legal distribution as a solution to a limited and controlled check on destructive corruption. Both in perception and efficiency, legal distribution can provides a check valve, away from power centers, on the most flagrant and arm folding corruption. Corruption so severe it outweighs economy of scale at it’s current scope. Rather than destroy entire governments, citizens can set up a soft but functional landing for the components of government they trust the least. Creating a framework of negotiation to prevent critical economy of scale from shrinking smaller than it is while subject to the waste, while cutting the most egregious bower brokers off from frustrating and impoverishing the public. This will preserve trust and avoid another disaster caused by multiple supply lines cut to near zero by sudden credit seizure and poverty.
Today pervasive new technologies abound, and can solve real world problems like potential nuclear reactor cascade failure. Many of these technologies are slowed by those power brokers because of disruptive properties that benefit market participants, but not non-obvious taxing beneficiaries. If we get out of the way enough for the market to get a footing, it can keep local economies and their power plants in good health, long enough to upgrade them to a system that will not bring the earth to sudden radioactive ruin. The point of no return.
“Civgene is the theory that human beings are genetically two separate behavioral sets, psychopaths and empaths (non psychopaths.)”
Would any attempt to “eliminate” or “segregate” the psychopaths be considered psychopathic in its own right? I mean, if you’re not empathizing with the psychopathic condition (the theory is, it is not a choice), you would have to be non-empathic (psychopathic) yourself. I think this is an error when classifying citizens as desirable or non-desirable seen throughout history, most famously under adolph hitler who wanted to cleanse society of anyone who was non-blonde-hair-blue-eyes most notably (but not exclusively) jewish people by religion– though i’ve heard in high school that more christians were killed by hitler just they were not targetted as a group. This has and is happening in other cultures too, one has to worry that by classifying a group of people as less-desirable we are heading towards that kind of “cleansing” here.
Absolutely you are correct, murder, genocide, segregation, singling groups out and taking rights and assets away for pre-crime, are all wrong. I have thought about this. So have others in the field.
But, handicaps can, do and must be considered when applying for a job.
Letting a known sociopath run for political office (for example) is insane. Their position is predicated on trust.
Please understand that it is well known that psychopaths only get worse when treated with empaths first line of defense. Therapy. For example an undetected psychopath may pray on other members of group therapy, using their own psychological issues against them. Not something a professional can willfully turn a blind eye too.
Three other thoughts on the morality of perusing the genetics of psychopathy.
I respect the nature of the way -you- look at this issue and am glad -someone- is looking at these issues. One thing i think from high school science classes, and that is what i think was called the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, which states that by “measuring something” (or someone) you CHANGE it. By trying to quantify someone, such as presenting them a tempting situation and seeing if they take advantage of it, you change that person. One of the things a friend of mine in college told me i thought was interesting, he said the reason he locks his car doors has nothing to do with preventing theft, rather it’s about “keeping honest people honest”. If a criminal wanted the car, a lock wouldn’t stop them. If you make something tempting or easy to take advantage of, someone who normally would not put in effort to steal it, may be tempted to take it because it is there and easy – so if you measured that person as psychopathic, in a normal situation they might not’ve acted that way.
If you measure someone and tell or treat them like they are a psychopath, does that affect the way they actually react in a different way than if you didn’t label it, i think the answer is a yes.
To translate this to software, if it’s easy to copy and share software (no protection) or music (same reasons) is someone a psychopath because they share (give or receive) non-paid-for copies of that software or music (?). Further, just because someone ‘cracks’ protection on software or music, does that make them a psychopath or someone who just likes a challenge and has too much time on their hands. What if the person comes from a poor family, and otherwise wouldn’t have ever purchased that software or music, is anyone harmed by them getting it for free? I could go farther down this path of reasoning but i think you get the idea.