The Final Solution

[DogmaHunter]

ISIS are anti homosexual? Is there some sort of symbolism in throwing them off of a high building?

Good job on ignoring the point being made.
A++

Not a grade to be particularly proud of though...

 

[joshua 1 9]

Social Darwinism is not Darwinism. The Theory of Evolution is precisely as culpable for ethnic cleansing as the Theory of Gravity is for a murderer throwing someone off a roof.

So are you suggesting that Darwin's theory does not have any application in the real world?

 

[Loudmouth]

So are you suggesting that Darwin's theory does not have any application in the real world?

Darwnin's theory does not call for anyone to apply it. We can apply atom theory to make nuclear bombs or nuclear power plants. What we should do is not determined by the theory. It is determined by morality.

 

[joshua 1 9]

You are side stepping the issues.

Homosexuals were a part of the final solution, based on Social Darwinism. Although it's difficult as it is against the rules to discuss some of these issues. We are told: "You will know them by their fruits." So we are looking at some of the fruit produced by Darwin's theory.

"Upon the rise of Adolf Hitler and the National Socialist German Workers Party (the Nazi Party) in Germany, gay men and, to a lesser extent, lesbians, were two of the numerous groups targeted by the Nazis and were ultimately among Holocaust victims. Beginning in 1933, gay organizations were banned, scholarly books about homosexuality, and sexuality in general, were burned, and homosexuals within the Nazi Party itself were murdered. The Gestapo compiled lists of homosexuals, who were compelled to sexually conform to the "German norm." " Wiki

 

[Loudmouth]

Homosexuals were a part of the final solution, based on Social Darwinism.

Social Darwinism is not the theory of evolution. Stop side stepping the issue.

 

[DogmaHunter]

So are you suggesting that Darwin's theory does not have any application in the real world?

Having practical application is entirely different from what you are trying to insinuate throughout this thread.

As has been said MANY times throughout this thread:
Scientific theories tell us how things ARE and/or how they work. They do NOT tell us how things SHOULD BE or should work.

Understanding how things ARE and how they work, is knowledge we can use in everyday life. How we use that knowledge is entirely upto us and in now way, shape or form whatsoever "dictated" by the theory itself.

This has been repeated to you by many people multiple times over.

Why do you continue to ignore that?
Why do you refuse to acknowledge this simple point?

What do you hope to gain by continuing to repeat these falsehoods?

Did you really expect ANYONE here, to respond to this thread with "ow, right... Hitler was evil therefor the unified theory of biology is wrong!!!" ???

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Social Darwinism is not the theory of evolution. Stop side stepping the issue.

You know he's going to keep going on with this train of thought, right?

 

[joshua 1 9]

Darwnin's theory does not call for anyone to apply it. We can apply atom theory to make nuclear bombs or nuclear power plants. What we should do is not determined by the theory. It is determined by morality.

Ok, that is fair. So Darwin's theory like a lot of other areas of science can be used for good or for evil. The question is does the theory work at all when it comes to eugenics. It would appear that this is a valid way to test the theory and when tested the theory fails.

 

[Loudmouth]

Ok, that is fair. So Darwin's theory like a lot of other areas of science can be used for good or for evil. The question is does the theory work at all when it comes to eugenics. It would appear that this is a valid way to test the theory and when tested the theory fails.

How we test a theory is determined by morality. There is a huge school of ethics that looks at human subjects in scientific experimentation and the moral way to go about doing science. Again, science can only tell us what the results of our actions will be. Morality is a set of philosophies that deals with what our actions should be.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Having practical application is entirely different from what you are trying to insinuate throughout this thread.

As has been said MANY times throughout this thread:
Scientific theories tell us how things ARE and/or how they work. They do NOT tell us how things SHOULD BE or should work.

Understanding how things ARE and how they work, is knowledge we can use in everyday life. How we use that knowledge is entirely upto us and in now way, shape or form whatsoever "dictated" by the theory itself.

This has been repeated to you by many people multiple times over.

Why do you continue to ignore that?
Why do you refuse to acknowledge this simple point?

What do you hope to gain by continuing to repeat these falsehoods?

Did you really expect ANYONE here, to respond to this thread with "ow, right... Hitler was evil therefor the unified theory of biology is wrong!!!" ???

Does the theory work or not? Darwin's theory does not appear to work when you try to apply it in the real world. Natural selection sounds good as a theory, but it does not work when you go to test it.

 

[Loudmouth]

Does the theory work or not?

Does Atomic Theory work? Yes. Does that mean we should build atomic bombs and drop them on people? No.

 

[DogmaHunter]

Ok, that is fair. So Darwin's theory like a lot of other areas of science can be used for good or for evil.

No.

When some maniac goes on a genocidal killing spree out of racist motivations, he's not "applying evolution theory" in any sense of the word.

 

[DogmaHunter]

Does the theory work or not?

Evolution theory accurately explains the process that life is subject to, yes.

Darwin's theory does not appear to work when you try to apply it in the real world.
Natural selection sounds good as a theory, but it does not work when you go to test it.

That makes no sense and can only be said by people who have no clue what they are talking about.

If you don't survive and/or reproduce you don't pass on your genes.
If you survive and reproduce, you do pass on your genes.

How on earth are those 2 statements not factual?

 

[DogmaHunter]

Does the theory work or not? Darwin's theory does not appear to work when you try to apply it in the real world. Natural selection sounds good as a theory, but it does not work when you go to test it.

Also, why do you refuse to answer my question? Here it is again:

Scientific theories tell us how things ARE and/or how they work. They do NOT tell us how things SHOULD BE or should work.

Understanding how things ARE and how they work, is knowledge we can use in everyday life. How we use that knowledge is entirely upto us and in now way, shape or form whatsoever "dictated" by the theory itself.

This has been repeated to you by many people multiple times over.

Why do you continue to ignore that?
Why do you refuse to acknowledge this simple point?

 

[Loudmouth]

Is infecting millions of people with Ebola a way to test Germ Theory? Yes. Does that mean that we should infect millions of people with Ebola? No.

Just because an experiment is a good way to test a theory does not mean that we should do that experiment.

 

[joshua 1 9]

How we test a theory is determined by morality. There is a huge school of ethics that looks at human subjects in scientific experimentation and the moral way to go about doing science. Again, science can only tell us what the results of our actions will be. Morality is a set of philosophies that deals with what our actions should be.

Then to what degree are eugenics considered to be moral? A lot of this has to do with taking care of people that can not take care of themselves. How do we deal with people that are in this situation? I can say it is wrong to kill a downs syndrome fetus. But the question then becomes who is going to take care of the downs baby once the baby is born? We have an issue with homeless people. They build shanty towns but the city does not want to provide police services for them. So in some areas they will go in and burn them down or tear it down.

The final solution was for them a solution to a long standing problem.

 

[Loudmouth]

Then to what degree are eugenics considered to be moral?

That is determined by morality and ethics, not scientific theories.

The final solution was for them a solution to a long standing problem.

Dropping the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was a solution to a long term problem for the Allies. Doesn't mean that it was the correct moral solution, nor does it put Atom Theory in doubt.

 

[joshua 1 9]

How we use that knowledge is entirely upto us and in now way, shape or form whatsoever "dictated" by the theory itself.

Correct, that is what THIS discussion is about. How do we use that knowledge. What is the practical application. You have to function in the real world. You have to get the plan off of the drawing table and build it. It is one thing to draw pretty pictures on a piece of paper, it is something else to build it in the real world.

 

[Loudmouth]

Correct, that is what THIS discussion is about. How do we use that knowledge. What is the practical application. You have to function in the real world. You have to get the plan off of the drawing table and build it. It is one thing to draw pretty pictures on a piece of paper, it is something else to build it in the real world.

The atomic bomb functions. Does that mean that we should doubt Atom Theory because it can be used to build atomic bombs that kill people?

 

[joshua 1 9]

That is determined by morality and ethics, not scientific theories.



Dropping the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was a solution to a long term problem for the Allies. Doesn't mean that it was the correct moral solution, nor does it put Atom Theory in doubt.

The decision was made because a determination was made that more people would die if they DID NOT drop the bomb. Was this decision based on good sound science or was it based on something else?

Surgeons cut on people with a knife. Today they have a lot more precision, so they are a lot less evasive and so the recovery rate is a lot faster. The help they provide is considered to far outweighs the negative aspects of the procedure.