Although it's not on topic, it has been brought up so I'll mention a way to keep thinking of a table with the openness of a child: you are more or less forced to believe there is something there, as experience has demonstrated that over and over and at some point you'd be pigheaded to deny it. But is it a table? What the heck is a table anyway? There's no such thing as a table, it's a unifying categorization you've invented to lump a set of similar observables together to get your head around a very complex reality. Reality hasn't the vaguest idea what a table is, and it has nothing to do with why it hurts to walk into one, but the grownups seem happy when you call it that.

Interesting to speculate which genes will be prominent in, say, a thousands years. With the current trend of everyone trying to act and talk "cool" I would guess the future genes may have that bit of easy-going, laid back feature. Also its interesting to note that looks are becoming less and less important, especially in males and what partners look for is more the attitude than merely looking handsome.

The "smart" genes will probably decrease as its common that most geeks/nerds find it harder to find suitable mates (unless they have those high-paying jobs ) and also due to the fact that smart couples usually have less children.

__________________
A slight inclination of the cranium is as adequate as a spasmodic movement of one optic towards an equinine quadruped utterly devoid of any visionary capacity.

The way humans focus on saving lives no matter what and survival, its easy to think that a LOT of genes that we may prefer to "take a hike" will, instead, be sticking around for the long run.

I'd say I'm not forced to believe there is a table, I'd say I accept there is a table there based upon my observations. If you tell me that you saw an elephant at the circus then I will accept my perception of you telling me this and I will probably accept that my perception of you telling me you saw an elephant at the circus is a suitable substitute for my own direct observations. That is, I will believe you. However if you told me you saw an elephant at the circus that could fly by flapping its ears then I probably wouldn't accept my perception of you telling me you saw an elephant that could fly by flapping its ears as a suitable stand in for my own direct observations and I wouldn't believe you.

Why on earth would we keep them if we don't want them around? At the moment we can knock out 60% of the genes that cause Huntington's chorea in mice. If we can get this up to 80% in humans then we can obviously almost wipe it out in two generations.