> It's just completely outside of today's Overton window

Never heard it expressed like that, but I guess you could apply it to tons of stuff?

> Lobotomy is not scientifically unsound, as aswegs8 proves, it's just completely outside of today's Overton window.

It is ethically unsound.

Oooph. I'm going to be charitable and make a (horrifying) steelman point for you: Eugenics can be understood as a subset of the ideas of plant and animal breeding that have been practiced for centuries. Those are scientifically sound, thus the idea that humans can be bred for certain traits should be too.

THAT SAID, "Eugenics" as espoused and understood over the past two centuries isn't that at all. It's 100%, every time, a pretty face for racism. Human social and ancestry divisions ARE NOT the product of deliberate selection, never have been, and any attempt to conflate the ideas is, yeah, pretty fucking unsound. And horrifying.

It is unsound because “better” is completely subjective and up to the definer. There’s no objective, scientific truth there.