Creation & EvolutionForum for the discussion of this important topic. This forum is open to non-believers. There is a Christians-only forum in the Christians-only section too.
I clearly (and on purpose) said, 'Hitler can take a hike' --- did I not?
Is the concept (or theory) of Eugenics embedded in Evolution, or isn't it?
Isn't.
Evolution is a scienfitic observation, and the theory thereof is a scientific theory. Eugenics is a social movement or philosophy. One does not follow the other.
It's still a (mis)application of the theory, not the theory itself. Point out to me an engineering manual that makes claims about how to commit vehicular homicide. Point out to me a nuclear physics theory textbook that points out the best place to bomb.
You're treating it as something that every evolutionist knows about as something that is (or at least should be) practised on an academic level but just keeps quiet about, and that simply isn't the case.
Evolutionists have only ever needed to address this when detractors bring it up, and the responses, starting from Darwin himself, have been resounding condemnation.
Besides, the key to success of a species that evolution brings is diversity and thus adaptability, above all. Eugenics would actually reduce that. Additionally, eugenics tends to select based on social desirability, and the links between that and the actual machinery of evolution - genes - is still undetermined.
__________________ ____________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Evolutionists have only ever needed to address this when detractors bring it up, and the responses, starting from Darwin himself, have been resounding condemnation.
Darwin?
You mean that guy who wrote, The Preservation of Favoured Races would resoundingly condemn Eugenics?
You mean that guy who wrote, The Preservation of Favoured Races would resoundingly condemn Eugenics?
Really?
That's the best you can do, that's your only response to the thread now? That old chestnut?
Firstly, use the full title - "On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life."
We're talking natural selection here, not artificial selection.
Nowhere in the book does he espouse killing off "unfavoured races".
In fact, he calls our urge to preserve all members of society "the noblest part of our nature", and he does this in the context of discussing eugenics.
Here's the longest section I could find that touches on the subject.
"With savages, the weak in body or mind are soon eliminated; and those that survive commonly exhibit a vigorous state of health. We civilized men, on the other hand, do our utmost to check the process of elimination. We build asylums for the imbecile, the maimed and the sick; we institute poor-laws; and our medical men exert their utmost skill to save the life of every one to the last moment. There is reason to believe that vaccination has preserved thousands, who from a weak constitution would formerly have succumbed to small-pox. Thus the weak members of civilized societies propagate their kind. No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man. It is surprising how soon a want of care, or care wrongly directed, leads to the degeneration of a domestic race; but excepting in the case of man himself, hardly anyone is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed.
The aid which we feel impelled to give to the helpless is mainly an incidental result of the instinct of sympathy, which was originally acquired as part of the social instincts, but subsequently rendered, in the manner previously indicated, more tender and more widely diffused. Nor could we check our sympathy, even at the urging of hard reason, without deterioration in the noblest part of our nature. The surgeon may harden himself whilst performing an operation, for he knows that he is acting for the good of his patient; but if we were intentionally to neglect the weak and helpless, it could only be for a contingent benefit, with an overwhelming present evil. Hence we must bear without complaining the undoubtedly bad effects of the weak surviving and propagating their kind; but there appears to be at least one check in steady action, namely the weaker and inferior members of society not marrying so freely as the sound; and this check might be indefinitely increased, though this is more to be hoped for than expected, by the weak in body or mind refraining from marriage"
Yes, his language and attitudes are somewhat Victorian (I figured best not to quote-mine the best bits just to prove my point ). But nowhere does he encourage eugenics.
__________________ ____________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Last edited by Cabal; 30th August 2009 at 11:15 AM.
According to the Marxist historian Robert Young, there is no distinction between Darwinism and Social Darwinism. This fact is not a denial of evolution itself, but an acknowledgment that Darwin's biological views attempted to bring man into nature and were built on the political economy of Malthus, Smith and others.
__________________ You must take your place in the great circle of...stuff.
According to the Marxist historian Robert Young, there is no distinction between Darwinism and Social Darwinism. This fact is not a denial of evolution itself, but an acknowledgment that Darwin's biological views attempted to bring man into nature and were built on the political economy of Malthus, Smith and others.
So you believe this is actually true, or someone with an agenda putting forward some tenuous argument?
You did say that Darwinism gets manipulated by people of both sides, and you felt the need to introduce this guy as a Marxist historian (as opposed to....?), so.....
Oh well, good job the theory of evolution has moved on a lot in the 150 years since Darwinism started!
__________________ ____________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
). But nowhere does he encourage eugenics. 
Linear Mode
