Is Genetic Diversity Good or Bad?

[TechFin]

It seems like when there's no genetic diversity, things get boring, but when there's too much genetic diversity, things get tense. It even causes wars.

Why is this? Is genetic diversity good or bad? When populations start looking too different... are they almost turning into new species? Why does Nature make species compete against each other?

What gives? Is genetic diversity good or bad?

[Hilderinc]

It seems like when there's no genetic diversity, things get boring, but when there's too much genetic diversity, things get tense. It even causes wars.

Why is this?

Every organism is fighting to survive, 'tribal affinities' between closely related organisms increases their chances of survival. So instead of fighting individual organisms, 'tribes' of organisms fight each other.

Is genetic diversity good or bad?

Objectively and scientifically speaking it is "supportive for the development of life." For example, whenever there is a mass extinction many organisms go extinct, but some survive. The more organisms exist the larger number of them survive. (mathematically speaking)

Speaking non-scientifically as a human, it is "neither", although it can be both good and bad in certain situations. As you say, war, a negative consequence. A positive consequence would be prosperity and stability. (Except this isn't really accomplished due to 'genetic diversity', but for the most part, the lack of it...)

When populations start looking too different... are they almost turning into new species?

Yes, Homo sapiens has 3 main sub-species (races), which will diverge into different species.

We can observe the chance from Wolf to Dog. Changes in their mental and physical characteristics made them dissimilar to the point they can no longer be considered one species.

Why does Nature make species compete against each other?

Life is about self-replication, whichever organism can make the most copies of itself is the 'most successful.'

In higher lifeforms, such as humans, the competition is very complex. It takes 2 human beings to produce an offspring, which means the offspring is not a 100% copy of the original. (Bacteria that produce asexually create exact copies of themselves, using only themselves to produce the 'offspring')

Brains, eyes, tribal affinities, and everything beyond the most simple self replicating collections of DNA, RNA, and proteins, are to get a 'one up' in the competition of life.

What gives? Is genetic diversity good or bad?

It is for the most part bad for us (organisms) since it means more to fight against.

It is good for life (as a whole) since it means life (as a whole) has a better chance of surviving (as a whole.)


------


I assume this is the genetic diversity that you mean. If you mean genetic diversity exclusively in humans, then it can be good (advantageous mutations, "progressiveness"), and bad (destabilized blends, disadvantageous mutations.) Tribal affinities, cultures, and many other factors which humans depend on to survive can also be disrupted by large changes in genetic makeup.


So the answer that we reach is that it, like everything in nature, is "neutral".

[Wynterwade]

What an epic question. There's just too much to cover in one post. So I'm going to answer in general language also.

It seems like when there's no genetic diversity, things get boring, but when there's too much genetic diversity, things get tense. It even causes wars.

Genetic diversity? I understand what you are trying to say but I don't think this is the correct word because it is just too general (genetic diversity as I have studied it in University is random genetic traits; lactose tolerance, color blind, disorders etc.) I think a more properly fitting term with what you are tying to ask would be racial diversity and/or cultural diversity.

Why is this?

Because some people are jackasses (usually on both sides).

Is genetic diversity good or bad?

Good when the differences are complimentary (ex. Italian students in a German University). Bad when the differences are clashing (ex. Muslims wanting sharia law in London, or political asylum seekers having 8 kids to live off public tax payer welfare money in London).

When populations start looking too different... are they almost turning into new species?

This really has literally nothing to do with the rest of your question. But yes, when sub-races start to diverge they are heading into different directions. Even Luigi Sforza has stated that human groups would be classified as different species by the same rule we use to judge species of other animals (African San, African Pygmy, Swedish, Japanese for example)

Why does Nature make species compete against each other?

Nature naturally forces everything into competition. Ever hear of evolution?

Is genetic diversity good or bad?

Genetic diversity is good when the diversity has positive traits that can be introduced into a population. Such as practical genes like lactose tolerance, aids resistant, tall height. Bad when you consider that certain African countries have an average IQ of 69 (where 70 is considered retarded) (IQ is a genetic trait read the research done on it in G-Factor by Arthur Jensen) and we actually allow RANDOM individuals from those countries immigration into ours!- and people wonder why immigrants from those countries are prone to violence? Bad genetics go figure!

Racial diversity can be bad when you have groups that behave considerably different and are more sexually active and spread Aids at a much faster rate than would be otherwise (Africans). Or groups that cause considerable violent crime (look at how the rates have changed in Sweden over the years) Too much foreign immigration can erode away thousands of years of genetic evolution- and our perception, behavior, mentality is genetic (I can give you many books on this; Geography of Thought, the Bell Curve) and will be gone forever.

Cultural diversity can be good; opening up an Italian restaurant in London, or bad, wanting Sharia law in London and a massive mosque in downtown overlooking the entire city.

There's good and bad in genetic diversity, racial diversity and cultural diversity. I think we should be adverse towards creating racial/cultural clashing. But many of our politicians are creating racial/cultural clashes because of liberal ideology that states all the differences between people are unimportant to even acknowledge. I think you will know what I mean without having to go into more explanation.

[Þoreiðar]

Please define what you mean by 'good' and 'bad' in this regard.

Relatively homogeneous communities have proven themselves thoughout history to be to more peaceful and well-functional than heterogeneous ones. But of course, (near-)complete homogenity is detrimental for a population's resistance to certain diseases and deformaties, among other things. Introduction of at least some amounts of new (/different) genes is absolutely necessary for the survival of any population. However, the current trends in racemixing is completely in opposition to the mechanisms of natural evolution.

According to nature, only the organisms who pass the most of their genes to it's following generations will survive in the long run. By mating with organisms that are less genetically similar to oneself than other organisms, one is infact working against the principles of natural evolution, as more of your own genes will be replaced by your partner's genes (and visa versa) in the genome of your common offspring. But then again, there is an element of balance to this as well, as your offspring is likely to develop weaknesses (degenerate) if your mate is too genetically similar to yourself, and thereby be worse equipped for survival and consequently not as likely to pass on the genes it inherited from you.

So unless one's child gains an immense evolutional edge by being any sort of hybrid offspring (which there is all evidence against in the case of most Europid individuals), racemixing is only detrimental to one's own genetical survival - and thus; suicidal.

(I'm sorry if my rambling is completely irrelevant to your question. )

[Werwolfthron]

All genetic studies show that even in homogenuous populations there is a large amount of internal genetic diversity; some people say we need to mix the races to keep them robust and dynamic, but all populations are in a constant state of evolution which provides beneficial genetic changes anyway.