From Darwin to Hitler

[HamletsChoice]

Has anyone read this book? Strong evidence for the connection of dawinism with Hitler and the Nazi's lack of sanctity of life for the "more animal like."

Well written scholarly work! Strongly recommend it.

 

[Dannager]

Has anyone read this book? Strong evidence for the connection of dawinism with Hitler and the Nazi's lack of sanctity of life for the "more animal like."

Well written scholarly work! Strongly recommend it.

What does Hitler's ridiculous misinterpretation of a scientific theory matter? It's not like it reflects in any way on the theory itself. Instead it just makes Hitler look like an imbecile.

 

[Phred]

Has anyone read this book? Strong evidence for the connection of dawinism with Hitler and the Nazi's lack of sanctity of life for the "more animal like."

Well written scholarly work! Strongly recommend it.

You're kidding, right? That's like suggesting Newton's theory of gravity was responsible for the V1 and V2 rockets... give me a break.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Hitler deliberatly misinterprited evolution, as many creationists do, to make it seem that there is a progression from worse to better (humans, naturally, being on top). Hitler used this eugenics to justify the genocide of the 'animalistic' and 'proto-human' Jews in an effort to purify the Aryan race in the name of God.

It should be noted that Hitler was a Christian, as was the majority of Nazi Germany. Also note that this is neither a condemnation of Christianity, nor a condolation of Nazism, just a Hitler's b*stardisation of evolution have any relevence to the validity of evolution.
As Phred said, you might as well say say that Newton's Laws of Motion and Gravity are a direct predecessor of the nuclear bomb.

 

[Biologist]

You're kidding, right? That's like suggesting Newton's theory of gravity was responsible for the V1 and V2 rockets... give me a break.

It's a little known fact, but equation E=mc^2 is responcible for building and launching nuclear weapons.

Not to mention, what hitler was doing, is unnatural selection. Which actually hurts the genome, and causes all kinds of other problems.

 

[BoneVulture]

Successful despots have the knack for finding support for their usually twisted ideologies with handpicked tidbits taken out of a larger context.

 

[GoSeminoles!]

Has anyone read this book? Strong evidence for the connection of dawinism with Hitler and the Nazi's lack of sanctity of life for the "more animal like."

Well written scholarly work! Strongly recommend it.

Have you read that Hitler was a Christian and repeatedly referred to himself as doing the Lord's work?

 

[rmwilliamsll]

The whole OP is predicated on the usual YECist confusion of the TofE as a scientific theory and the metaphysics some people have derived from their study of science, in particular social darwinianism. SD is a philosophy, maybe a significant part of a world view, it is however certainly not science, it is a confusion of levels to conflate the two very different systems of thought.

 

[Vainglorious]

Has anyone read this book? Strong evidence for the connection of dawinism with Hitler and the Nazi's lack of sanctity of life for the "more animal like."

Well written scholarly work! Strongly recommend it.

Conflating Social Darwinism with Evolution Theory is like conflating the Ku Klux Klan with Christianity.

 

[Abongil]

Which theory is going to be responisble for the advent of laser weapons? Black hole theory? Naw, that woul dbe a singularity weapon (which would be pretty awesome).

 

[TeddyKGB]

Which theory is going to be responisble for the advent of laser weapons? Black hole theory? Naw, that woul dbe a singularity weapon (which would be pretty awesome).

Whichever theory provides a ridiculously powerful, portable energy supply.

 

[Hydra009]

The whole OP is predicated on the usual YECist confusion of the TofE as a scientific theory and the metaphysics some people have derived from their study of science, in particular social darwinianism. SD is a philosophy, maybe a significant part of a world view, it is however certainly not science, it is a confusion of levels to conflate the two very different systems of thought.

Exactly. Imo, it's an example of guilt by association, implying that a scientific theory must be wrong because it has been associated with bad people. Implying that evolution is wrong because the Nazism praticed eugenics is the logical equivalent of claiming that heliocentrism is wrong because Hitler believed it. It's a pretty embarrassing desperation tactic which is used because one can't attack evolution on scientific grounds, and instead has to engage in mud-slinging.

 

[birdan]

New book by Discovery Institute
Fellow shows influence of Darwinian principles on Hitler's Nazi regime

Discovery Institute is pleased to announce the publication of the provocative intellectual history, "From Darwin to Hitler, Evolutionary Ethics, Eugenics and Racism in Germany" (Palgrave MacMillan), by Richard Weikart.

For balance, have you read Martin Luther - Hitler's Spiritual Ancestor by Perter F Wiener?

Have you read Martin Luther's The Jews and Their Lies (1543)? From that little text:

(Excerpted for posting length)
What shall we Christians do with this rejected and condemned people, the Jews? Since they live among us, we dare not tolerate their conduct, now that we are aware of their lying and reviling and blaspheming. If we do, we become sharers in their lies, cursing and blaspemy. Thus we cannot extinguish the unquenchable fire of divine wrath, of which the prophets speak, nor can we convert the Jews. With prayer and the fear of God we must pratice a sharp mercy to see whether we might save at least a few from the glowing flames. We dare not avenge ourselves. Vengenance a thousand times worse than we could wish them already has them by the throat. I shall give you my sincere advice:

First to set fire to their synagogues or schools and to bury and cover with dirt whatever will not burn, so that no man will ever again see a stone or cinder of them.

Second, I advise that their houses also be razed and destroyed. For they pursue in them the same aims as in their synagogues.

Third, I advise that all their prayer books and Talmudic writings, in which such idolatry, lies, cursing and blasphemy are taught, be taken from them.

Fourth, I advise that their rabbis be forbidden to teach henceforth on pain of loss of life and limb.

Fifth, I advise that safe-conduct on the highways be abolished completely for the Jews.

Sixth, I advise that usury be prohibited to them, and that all cash and treasure of silver and gold be taken from them and put aside for safekeeping.

Seventh, I commend putting a flail, an ax, a hoe, a spade, a distaff, or a spindle into the hands of young, strong Jews and Jewesses and letting them earn their bread in the sweat of their brow,

If this does not help we must drive them out like mad dogs, so that we do not become partakers of their abominable blasphemy and all their other vices and thus merit God's wrath and be damned with them.

My essay, I hope, will furnish a Christian (who in any case has no desire to become a Jew) with enough material not only to defend himself against the blind, venomous Jews, but also to become the foe of the Jews' malice, lying, and cursing, and to understand not only that their belief is false but that they are surely possessed by all devils.

Now which of these people, Darwin or Luther, sounds most imitated and copied from by Hitler?

 

[BeamMeUpScotty]

Science does not happen in a political or social vaccuum. Eisenhower moved forward on the A-bomb at Einstien's urging. That doesn't make the science good or evil, it just is.

This can be seen by the continuing debate over whether or not the bombs were a military necessity to end WWII. People aren't debating the science, as it's pretty obvious it worked, but they are debating the ethicallity of its use.

Thus, whatever Hitler thought about evolution is irrelevant toward the science. How he (mis)used it to justify any actions is what should be debated. Quickly in that debate it should be easy for any to see that Hitler clearly misunderstood evolution, its mechanisms, and its science.

As has been stated before, judging all of Christianity based on the actions of the KKK would be ludicrous. So would be judging all of Islam based on 19 terrorists.

So, again, science doesn't happen in a vaccuum, which means that people can and do misuse it--sometimes mistakenly, sometimes on purpose.

 

[jamesrwright3]

It should be noted that Hitler was a Christian, as was the majority of Nazi Germany. Also note that this is neither a condemnation of Christianity, nor a condolation of Nazism, just a Hitler's *******isation of evolution have any relevence to the validity of evolution.
b.

Hitler was NOT a Christian. That is a fallacy.

 

[Lucretius]

Hitler was NOT a Christian. That is a fallacy.

Actually he was. Read anything written by him to verify.

 

[combatant]

Hitler deliberatly misinterprited evolution, as many creationists do, to make it seem that there is a progression from worse to better (humans, naturally, being on top).

I think it is quite ignorant to think that the theory of evolution does not logically indicate a "progression" of evolution. The theory says that bigger, smarter, more complex creatures arise out of creatures with less advantages and less complexity.

 

[jamesrwright3]

Actually he was. Read anything written by him to verify.

He was not a Christian.
Just because someone calls themself a Christian, doesn't mean he was a Christian by any sense of the word

The Third Reich was more into the occult than most people know.

 

[Lucretius]

He was not a Christian.
Just because someone calls themself a Christian, doesn't mean he was a Christian by any sense of the word

The Third Reich was more into the occult than most people know.

What I find strange is that every Christian thinks they have the right to judge whether any other person who says they are a Christian is TRULY a christian. And they also all have different reasonings as to what makes someone a TRUE Christian.

You want to talk fallacies? Try the No True Scotsman fallacy that you are committing.

 

[pantsman52]

I think it is quite ignorant to think that the theory of evolution does not logically indicate a "progression" of evolution. The theory says that bigger, smarter, more complex creatures arise out of creatures with less advantages and less complexity.

Only if bigger, smarter, and more complex are advantages in the given environment. Evolution is not prescriptive, it is descriptive.