• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Is Islamic faith reasonable.

1robin

Christian/Baptist
LOL! These arguments from believers are not only dishonest but show a severe lack of understanding of what Communism is all about and those who took advantage of it to maintain a dictatorship.
I don't care about communism, I was speaking about atheistic/evolution, communsim was a side note.

Was Stalin's agenda entirely due to atheism or was it based on removing ALL threats to making Communism as a system work with him as it's ultimate dictator? It was the latter, of course, which includes changing ALL facets of societies and how they function, with religion only playing a minor role amongst many others.
I thought I had stated clearly I am not claiming that the primary reason Stalin did what he did was atheism. I said that his justification he used to allow himself to do these things was based on Atheistic evolutionary principles ie....the lack of the sanctity of life, the survival of the fittest by any means, the greater good at the expense of a smaller group, his loss of control produced by spiritual beliefs etc......

Did Stalin only then murder believers and allow all the atheists to live? Of course not. He removed any threat to his position in power and all those who knew his agenda to keep that power.
read the above


Seriously 1robin, try get a handle on learning what actually happened over there and for what reasons rather than tossing out ridiculous, misinformed claims.
If you will read a little slower and get a grasp for what I actually said instead of what you claim it might make it clearer. These subjects are currently covered in some of the debates between the most respected modern philosophers. They are well known issues which the professional atheist debaters never can seem to competently counter.
 

1robin

Christian/Baptist
This is true. Atheism shares a trait with science, which is that morality is not part of it.
But then, sanctity of life comes from individual desire for it. As the faithful show us, they too will disregard sanctity of life at times. I'll spare you examples.

But once again, to violate this principal occurs regularly among religious folk, eg, religious based terrorism, crime & war. .
Yes but the atheistic evolutionist is acting consistent with his philosophy while the Christian/Jew/ and maybe the Muslim is not, and therefore is not reflective of the religion.

This is disproven by the calls of religious people that we move in a communistic direction.
And yet, many of us heathens prefer capitalism & librerty....you'll find a lot of atheists &
agnostics in the Libertarian Party.
I should have said that communist movement really too off or BEGAN as a result of dissatisfaction with religion and disallusionment after WW1


Oh, dear...evolution doesn't provide moral justification for anything at all.
It's just about how life tends to behave over time.
It is derived from the implications of the theory by tyrants throughout modern times. Ex..there is no sanctity or special worth to individual life.

You'll need a really good link to support that claim. I've seen & looked into it before, but found
no evidence at all. Face it....Hitler was a Xian, albeit a really bad & strange example.
Which claim do you contest? See my response to troubled man if it is his evolutionary beliefs you doubt. What is a Xian? Is it his root belief in the Tibetan origin of the aryan race crap?
 

1robin

Christian/Baptist
What framework?

Atheism DEALS WITH ONLY CONCEPT or QUESTION OF THEISM. Theism is about belief in the existence of gods, and atheism don't believe in their existence. And nothing else.

There are no creed or dogma in atheism (or in agnosticism). There are no scriptures on atheism. There are also no moral codes and laws.

And like I said, atheism is not a political system. Nor is atheism can be equated to science, as some Christians seemed to confuse the 2 together.

Communism, socialism, capitalism, democracy, republic, monarch, are all political systems, and really have nothing to do with atheism. You are misguided to think that communism and atheism are one and the same.

Can atheist be a bad person? Yes. So can, Christian, Muslim, Hindu or any others - be bad or do unconscionable things.
I have watched at least a dozen of the professional debates about this topic. They always follow the same pattern.
1. The Atheist accuses religion of violence.
2. The religous guy responds with details showing Atheists have killed way more people.
3. The atheist tries to wiggle out of this by narrowly defineing atheistic evolution.
4. The religous guy gives an actual common sence definition of Atheistic evolution and it's obvious implications and supplys quotes by the atheists themselves.
5. The atheist equivocates, makes an ineffective counter argument, or misdirects.
And on we go.

Atheists themselves dissagree with you. It is true that "If God does not exist, everything is permitted" is an accurate capsule description of the belief espoused by Ivan Karamazov. This phrase is also accredited to Dostoevsky.

I have realised that what F0uad said is correct. This is far from the topic of this thread, I should know this as it is my thread. I will try to steer the discussion back that way.
 

A Troubled Man

Active Member
I don't care about communism, I was speaking about atheistic/evolution, communsim was a side note.

LOL! How blatantly dishonest.

I said that his justification he used to allow himself to do these things was based on Atheistic evolutionary principles

Yes, I know what you said, hence my responses to your confusion.

If you will read a little slower and get a grasp for what I actually said instead of what you claim it might make it clearer. These subjects are currently covered in some of the debates between the most respected modern philosophers. They are well known issues which the professional atheist debaters never can seem to competently counter.

LOL! So, now you're comparing your confusion to that of respected modern philosophers?

My sides are a splittin'
 

A Troubled Man

Active Member
I don't want to interfere but secularism is based on humanism and atheism don't you think? (just a question)

No, it isn't. Secularism allows you and everyone else to practice their religion without anyone else telling them what to believe or how to run their life based on their religious beliefs. The same would stand for you if you tried to tell others what to believe or how to run their lives based on your religious beliefs.
 

Dirty Penguin

Master Of Ceremony
I wish evolution was left out of everything.

But it's not important to the thread topic. You're trying to make it important in a discussion that has nothing to do with evolution.

Darwinism and the Nazi race Holocaust
by Jerry Bergman
Leading Nazis, and early 1900 influential German biologists, revealed in their writings that Darwin’s theory and publications had a major influence upon Nazi race policies. Hitler believed that the human gene pool could be improved by using selective breeding similar to how farmers breed superior cattle strains. In the formulation of their racial policies, Hitler’s government relied heavily upon Darwinism, especially the elaborations by Spencer and Haeckel. As a result, a central policy of Hitler’s administration was the development and implementation of policies designed to protect the ‘superior race’. This required at the very least preventing the ‘inferior races’ from mixing with those judged superior, in order to reduce contamination of the latter’s gene pool. The ‘superior race’ belief was based on the theory of group inequality within each species, a major presumption and requirement of Darwin’s original ‘survival of the fittest’ theory. This philosophy culminated in the ‘final solution’, the extermination of approximately six million Jews and four million other people who belonged to what German scientists judged as ‘inferior races’.

Darwinism and the Nazi race Holocaust
There are quite a few quotes by Hitler at this site.

I will add that evolutionary principles was not the primary reason Hitler exterminated Jews. It was however justification for it (or at least he believd it was)

Yours is a fallacy based on ignorance.

Hitler and evolution - RationalWiki
"One aspect of the connection, which can cause confusion, is the generally accepted fact that Hitler's conception of racial of national struggle and supremacy bore some relationship to social Darwinism, a political theory which can be summed up as "survival of the fittest, applied to people". Social Darwinism is distinct from the biological theory of evolution, and only loosely connected with Charles Darwin, whom Hitler is not known to have ever mentioned. "

Better yet....try here;

Other Essays - Hitler's Religion
"It is widely acknowledged that the most authoritative statement on Hitler's beliefs and plans was his infamous book "Mein Kampf". Yet while this book is known worldwide for its hateful nature, few have ever read it and fewer still have identified the voluminous statements within that clearly mark Adolf Hitler as a Christian. There are many such statements, and they reveal a great deal about his motivations"



:sad:
 
Last edited:

A Troubled Man

Active Member
3. The atheist tries to wiggle out of this by narrowly defineing atheistic evolution.

That is entirely not true because there is no such thing as "atheistic evolution" by definition.

4. The religous guy gives an actual common sence definition of Atheistic evolution and it's obvious implications and supplys quotes by the atheists themselves.

In other words, the religious guy creates a false premise and supports it with logical fallacies.
 

Road Warrior

Seeking the middle path..
I wish evolution was left out of everything.....I will add that evolutionary principles was not the primary reason Hitler exterminated Jews. It was however justification for it (or at least he believd it was)

Sorry to intrude on a discussion so far off-topic and deeply in violation of Godwin's Law, but if someone wants to link evolutionary principles to Nazism, they will also have to link Nazism to Christians since Friar Gregor Mendel was the founder of genetic research. The Nazis were more in into creating a master race through selective breeding (i.e. genetics), not "evolution". They felt Jews, homosexuals, the mentally or physically "defective" were all "contaminants" of human "breed" and chose to murder to preserve Aryan Purity. OTOH, Nazis certainly weren't Christian in their ethics.

The problem here, as I see it, is that genetics, evolution, guns, the Bible or any other field of study or inanimate object can't harm anyone. It takes a human being to use science wisely or unwisely. The same for a gun, an axe or a religion. I fail to understand why anyone would think God wants us to remain ignorant about the laws of the Natural Universe....the same Universe created by God. It doesn't make sense to me for any religious person to choose to remain ignorant of science.
 

1robin

Christian/Baptist
LOL! How blatantly dishonest.
Here is the totality of what I said "It was a stated goal to wipe out faith by any means. Communism is a direct result itself from a rejection of faith." This is one sentence concerning communism out of the hundreds I have made on the subject. If you have any honor you will retract your assertion of dishonesty. Marx believed that capitalism would be replaced by socialism which in turn would bring upon communism. He was the author of "The Communist Manifesto" and was well known for being the father of communism. Who is the father of communism socialism
"Religion is the opium of the people" is one of the most frequently paraphrased statements of Karl Marx.
The communist movement began in earnest because of the disillusionment with religion following WW1.
So stop LOLing and start reading. However my discussion was about Atheistic/evolution and communism was not integral to that position and I don't care about communism. It will destroy itself anyway and it's already begun.
Yes, I know what you said, hence my responses to your confusion
Either you are being purposefully obtuse or you just can't grasp the obvious implications that many respected philosophers discuss in detail.
LOL! So, now you're comparing your confusion to that of respected modern philosophers?
Either discuss something intelligently or quit making this ridiculous commentary based on nothing.
My sides are a splitting'
This sure was useful, and a fine defense of your position.
 

1robin

Christian/Baptist
But it's not important to the thread topic. You're trying to make it important in a discussion that has nothing to do with evolution.



Yours is a fallacy based on ignorance.

Hitler and evolution - RationalWiki
"One aspect of the connection, which can cause confusion, is the generally accepted fact that Hitler's conception of racial of national struggle and supremacy bore some relationship to social Darwinism, a political theory which can be summed up as "survival of the fittest, applied to people". Social Darwinism is distinct from the biological theory of evolution, and only loosely connected with Charles Darwin, whom Hitler is not known to have ever mentioned. "

Better yet....try here;

Other Essays - Hitler's Religion
"It is widely acknowledged that the most authoritative statement on Hitler's beliefs and plans was his infamous book "Mein Kampf". Yet while this book is known worldwide for its hateful nature, few have ever read it and fewer still have identified the voluminous statements within that clearly mark Adolf Hitler as a Christian. There are many such statements, and they reveal a great deal about his motivations"



:sad:


How Evolutionary Ethics Influenced Hitler and Why It Matters
On 01.05.12 | In Christian Ethics, Darwinism, Evolution | by admin.
By Richard Weikart –

[Editor’s Note: This is the third article in a series of three. Read part 1 and part 2.]
One point that I explain in my book, From Darwin to Hitler: Evolutionary Ethics, Eugenics, and Racism in Germany, aroused considerable controversy, and it flamed up even more after Ben Stein interviewed me for the documentary, Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed
ir
, which promoted Intelligent Design. This controversy swirled over the claim that Hitler and the Nazis were influenced profoundly by Darwinism.

When I first began investigating the impact of Darwinism on ethics, morality, and social thought in late nineteenth-century Germany, Hitler and Nazism were not even on my radar screen. However, as I began discovering the connections between Darwinism and eugenics, euthanasia, and racial extermination, I couldn’t help but notice how many ideas being promoted in the name of evolutionary ethics seemed remarkably similar to Nazi ideology. The Nazis, after all, had implemented the most radical program of coerced sterilization in the world in order to try to improve human heredity. After World War II began, they began killing the disabled by the thousands.
I began studying Hitler’s ideology in depth to find out how important Darwinism was in his worldview. Many historians had already remarked on the importance of social Darwinism in Hitler’s ideology. However, few had explored this from the angle of evolutionary ethics. I discovered that even though Hitler never used the term evolutionary ethics, he did indeed base his morality on Darwinian evolution.
When I wrote From Darwin to Hitler: Evolutionary Ethics, Eugenics, and Racism in Germany, only the final chapter explicates the role of Darwinism in Hitler’s worldview. This chapter provoked the greatest controversy, however, with some internet critics claiming that Hitler rejected Darwinism and was a creationist. Thus, I decided to follow it up with an entire book devoted to the role of evolution in Hitler’s worldview: Hitler’s Ethic: The Nazi Pursuit of Evolutionary Progress. Therein I demonstrate not only that Hitler believed in Darwinian evolution, including the evolution of humans, but I also showed in detail that evolutionary ethics was central to Hitler’s worldview. It influenced many elements of Nazi ideology and policy, including:
1) Racial inequality:

Hitler believed that different races had formed through evolutionary processes and were at different evolutionary levels. He thought the Aryan or Nordic race (these terms were used synonymously by Nazis) was the most advanced. These views were not idiosyncratic, but were common among German evolutionary biologists during the early twentieth century.
2) History as a racial struggle for existence:

Hitler thought that races were locked in an ineluctable racial struggle. He promoted policies that favored the Aryans and disadvantaged other allegedly inferior races, especially the Jews, in order to help the Aryans win the struggle for existence. Of course, those losing the struggle would eventually be eliminated, one way or another, as the Aryans took over the globe.
3) Eugenics policies, such as compulsory sterilization, forced abortions, and killing of the disabled:

These eugenics policies were designed to prevent biological degeneration and help along the process of evolution.
4) The drive for population expansion:

Darwin claimed in Descent of Man that the birthrate should not be limited, because a higher birthrate was advantageous for evolution. Hitler agreed and often expressed the same view.
5) The need to acquire living space (through military means):

This idea originated with the German Darwinian biologist-turned-geographer Friedrich Ratzel, who had argued that the struggle for existence was essentially a struggle for space. Hitler often expressed the need for living space in evolutionary terms. He linked it to population expansion and the racial struggle. Gaining living space and driving out the inhabitants was the way to improve the human species by increasing the “master” race at the expense of the “inferior” races.
6) Evolution of moral traits:

Hitler, like many other contemporary biologists and psychiatrists, argued that moral traits were biologically determined. He believed that the Aryans had the most advanced morality, as they were allegedly more loyal, honest, diligent, etc. On the other hand, he deemed Jews biologically immoral, since he blamed them for being lazy, mendacious, sexually lascivious, greedy, etc. Thus, by ridding the world of the Jews and replacing them with Aryans, Hitler in his own perverted view thought he was improving the world by banishing immorality and increasing morality.
Why does this matter? As many of my critics have pointed out, most Darwinists are not Nazis. So why should we care if the Nazis used Darwinism for their own perverted purposes?
While it is unlikely that anything quite like Nazism will ever spring from Darwinian premises again, there are many other ways that Darwinism is being used to devalue human life today (as I showed in my previous piece). Abortion is rampant, and eugenics and euthanasia are once again becoming fashionable in academic circles. While Darwinism is by no means the sole cause of this devaluing of human life, many prominent scholars, such as Peter Singer and Richard Dawkins, admit that it plays a significant role.


How Evolutionary Ethics Influenced Hitler and Why It Matters- Credo Magazine

There is no point carrying on a war of the most web sites. The above logic is perfectly reasonable and displays the implications inherent in evolutionary philosophy.
 

1robin

Christian/Baptist
That is entirely not true because there is no such thing as "atheistic evolution" by definition.
I get so tired of these stupid semantic issues. Fine call it non-theistic evolution. In other words and you already knew this, and so your contention was made for a trivial reason, Evolutionary forces completely divorced from a theistic context.



[/quote]In other words, the religious guy creates a false premise and supports it with logical fallacies.[/quote] Oh....Good comeback. There are no reasonable contentions to the obvious implications of (naturalistic, non-theistic, non- supernartural, unguided, etc..... evolution) If granted it means certain things are true and others are not. You can't ignore that because you don't like it.
 
Last edited:

1robin

Christian/Baptist
Sorry to intrude on a discussion so far off-topic and deeply in violation of Godwin's Law, but if someone wants to link evolutionary principles to Nazism, they will also have to link Nazism to Christians since Friar Gregor Mendel was the founder of genetic research. The Nazis were more in into creating a master race through selective breeding (i.e. genetics), not "evolution". They felt Jews, homosexuals, the mentally or physically "defective" were all "contaminants" of human "breed" and chose to murder to preserve Aryan Purity. OTOH, Nazis certainly weren't Christian in their ethics.
What is Godwin's law? and you are right about the topic. Even if Mendel was a born again Christian (a suggestion so unlikely it's hard to think of a worse one) his actions were in direct violation of the core values layed out in the bible and so reflect nothing on Christianity. Christianity should be evaluated by people who are following it.

The problem here, as I see it, is that genetics, evolution, guns, the Bible or any other field of study or inanimate object can't harm anyone. It takes a human being to use science wisely or unwisely. The same for a gun, an axe or a religion. I fail to understand why anyone would think God wants us to remain ignorant about the laws of the Natural Universe....the same Universe created by God. It doesn't make sense to me for any religious person to choose to remain ignorant of science.
Talk about off the subject. I have 190 semester hours credit at a very respected school of engineering and a associates in math. I know of no Christian whatsoever that rejects or dismisses science in general. Many of the breakthroughs in science were found by Christians. I have never even stated that evolution is untrue because of the negative implications it has. I just simply pointed out that it has them
 

Dirty Penguin

Master Of Ceremony
There is no point carrying on a war of the most web sites. The above logic is perfectly reasonable and displays the implications inherent in evolutionary philosophy.

Obviously we should clarify Hitler's position by at least presenting what he actually thought and not what some other author thinks he meant....This is just a snippet of what he said in his book.

Other Essays - Hitler's Religion

"I had excellent opportunity to intoxicate myself
with the solemn splendor of the brilliant church festivals
.
As was only natural, the abbot seemed to me, as the village
priest had once seemed to my father, the highest and most desirable
ideal."2 (Hitler
admired religious figures).

"I thank Heaven that a portion of the memories of those
days still remains with me
. Woods and meadows were the battlefields
on which the 'conflicts' which exist everywhere in life
were decided."3 (Hitler
believed in Heaven).

"I was not in agreement with the sharp anti-Semitic
tone, but from time to time I read arguments which gave me some
food for thought.
At all events, these occasions slowly made me
acquainted with the man and the movement, which in those days
guided Vienna's destinies: Dr. Karl Lueger and the Christian
Social Party ... The man and the movement seemed
'reactionary' in my eyes. My common sense of justice,
however, forced me to change this judgment in proportion as I had
occasion to become acquainted with the man and his work; and slowly
my fair judgment turned to unconcealed admiration. Today, more than
ever, I regard this man as the greatest German mayor of all times
... How many of my basic principles were upset by this change in my
attitude toward the Christian Social movement! My views with
regard to anti-Semitism thus succumbed to the passage of time, and
this was my greatest transformation of all."4 (Hitler was inspired to become a
radical anti-Semite by the Viennese Christian Social movement,
whose attitudes are almost identical to the far-right American
Christian fundamentalist movement today).

"Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the
will of the Almighty Creator
: by defending myself against
the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the
Lord."5 (Hitler
obviously believed in a supreme being).

"Sooner will a camel pass through a needle's eye
than a great man be 'discovered' by an
election
"6 (Hitler was
fond of paraphrasing the Bible (Mark 10:25 in this case), and he
does this many, many times elsewhere in the book).

"The root of the whole evil lay, particularly in
Schonerer's opinion, in the fact that the directing body of the
Catholic Church was not in Germany, and that for this very
reason alone it was hostile to the interests of our
nationality
."7
(affirming that Hitler's only real problem with his childhood
religion was the fact that its power base was not in Germany).

"I had so often sung 'Deutschland u:ber Alles' and
shouted 'Heil' at the top of my lungs, that it seemed to me
almost a belated act of grace to be allowed to stand as a witness
in the divine court of the eternal judge and proclaim the
sincerity of this conviction
."8 (the "divine court of the
eternal judge" seems a rather strange idea from anyone but a
Judeo-Christian, since Pagan and Eastern religions generally lack
any such divine judgemental entity, to say nothing of atheism)

"Certainly we don't have to discuss these matters with the
Jews, the most modern inventors of this cultural perfume. Their
whole existence is an embodied protest against the aesthetics of
the Lord's image.
"9

"Once again the songs of the fatherland roared to the
heavens along the endless marching columns, and for the last
time the Lord's grace smiled on His ungrateful
children.
"10
(recalling World War I).

"What we must fight for is to safeguard the existence and
reproduction of our race and our people, the sustenance of our
children and the purity of our blood, the freedom and independence
of the fatherland, so that our people may mature for the
fulfillment of the mission allotted it by the creator of the
universe.
"11 (it
would appear that Hitler agreed with modern "intelligent
design" creationists on the existence of a Creator).

"Parallel to the training of the body a struggle against the
poisoning of the soul must begin
. Our whole public life
today is like a hothouse for sexual ideas and simulations.
Just look at the bill of fare served up in our movies, vaudeville
and theaters, and you will hardly be able to deny that this is not
the right kind of food, particularly for the youth ... Theater,
art, literature, cinema, press, posters, and window displays must
be cleansed of all manifestations of our rotting world
..."12 (Jerry
Falwell? Is that you?)

"But if out of smugness, or even cowardice, this battle is not
fought to its end, then take a look at the peoples five hundred
years from now. I think you will find but few images of
God
"13 (note
that when he says "images of God", he refers to racially
pure Aryans; this sentence comes in the context of a diatribe
against racial intermixing).

"While both denominations maintain missions in Asia and Africa
in order to win new followers for their doctrine-- an activity
which can boast but very modest success compared to the advance of
the Mohammedan faith in particular-- right here in Europe
they lose millions and millions of inward adherents who either are
alien to all religious life or simply so their own ways. The
consequences, particularly from a moral point of view, are
not favorable
."14
(Hitler agrees with George W. Bush that religion and morality are
intertwined).

"Also noteworthy is the increasingly violent struggle against
the dogmatic foundations of the various churches without which in
this human world the practical existence of a religious
faith is not conceivable
... The attack against dogmas as such,
therefore, strongly resembles the struggle against the general
legal foundations of a state, and, as the latter would end in a
total anarchy of the state, the former would end in a worthless
religious nihilism."15 (Hitler, trying to equate
criticism of dogma to an assault on civilization)

"The result of all racial crossing is therefore in brief
always the following: (a) Lowering of the level of the higher race;
(b) Physical and intellectual regression and hence the beginning of
a slowly but surely progressing sickness. To bring about such a
development is, then, nothing else but to sin against the will
of the eternal creator.
"16 (Hitler tries to define racial
intermarriage as defiance of God's will, in exactly the way
modern racists do, particularly in the southern American states;
indeed, 40% of Alabama voters voted to keep interracial marriage
illegal in November 2000)

"And a religion in the Aryan sense cannot be imagined which
lacks the conviction of survival after death in some form.
Indeed, the Talmud is not a book to prepare a man for the
hereafter, but only for a practical and profitable life in this
world.
"17 (Hitler
believes in the afterlife, and he agrees with modern Christian
fundamentalists about the importance of religious matters over
material matters)

"The best characterization is provided by the product of this
religious education, the Jew himself. His life is only of this
world, and his spirit is inwardly as alien to true
Christianity as his nature two thousand years previous was to
the great founder of the new doctrine. Of course, the latter
made no secret of his attitude toward the Jewish people, and when
necessary he even took the whip to drive from the temple of the
Lord this adversary of all humanity, who then as always saw in
religion nothing but an instrument for his business existence. In
return, Christ was nailed to the cross, while our
present-day party Christians debase themselves to begging for
Jewish votes at elections and later try to arrange political
swindles with atheistic Jewish parties
-- and this against their own
nation."18 (Hitler
demonstrates the common anti-Semitic view that Jesus was an Aryan
rather than a Jew, and glowingly described him as "the great
founder of the new doctrine".

Once again....
Hitler and evolution - RationalWiki

"Social Darwinism is distinct from the biological theory of evolution, and only loosely connected with Charles Darwin, whom Hitler is not known to have ever mentioned. "

:sad:
 
Last edited:

1robin

Christian/Baptist
Obviously we should clarify Hitler's position by at least presenting what he actually thought .
Ok
For Hitler, the struggle among men was between competing races. As Hitler put it,"[T]he folkish philosophy [i.e.Hitler’s own view] finds the importance of mankind in its basic racial elements. … Thus, it by no means believes in an equality of the races, but … feels itself obligated… to promote the victory of the better and stronger, and demand the subordination of the inferior and weaker …" (p. 56).

In Hitler’s own words: "History itself represents the progression of a people’s(
Volks) struggle for life" (p. 36). "All of nature is a powerful struggle between power and weakness, an eternal victory of the strong over the weak" (p. 37). "in the limitation of this living space (Lebensraum) lies the compulsion for the struggle for life, and the struggle for life, in turn, contains the precondition for evolution"(p. 36). "The entire universe appears to be ruled only by this one idea, that eternal selection takes place, in which the stronger in the end preserves its life and theright to life, and the weaker falls"

(p. 36).Hitler’s speeches and writings reveal frequent references to struggle,survival of the fittest, natural selection, and yes, evolution. Hitler’s evolutionary philosophy has often been overlooked, Weikart suggests,in part because the term he used for ‘evolution’ (


Entwicklung) and ‘higher evolution’ (Hoherentwicklung) are often translated as simply‘development’ in the standard English edition of Mein Kampf (p. 36).


"Social Darwinism is distinct from the biological theory of evolution, and only loosely connected with Charles Darwin, whom Hitler is not known to have ever mentioned. "


Image2.gif


[/quote]Hitler and the Theory of Evolution


For more information please see: Evolutionary racism and Social effects of the theory of evolution  


The staunch evolutionist Stephen Gould admitted the following:


"[Ernst] Haeckel was the chief apostle of evolution in Germany.... His evolutionary racism; his call to the German people for racial purity and unflinching devotion to a "just" state; his belief that harsh, inexorable laws of evolution ruled human civilization and nature alike, conferring upon favored races the right to dominate others; the irrational mysticism that had always stood in strange communion with his brave words about objective science - all contributed to the rise of Nazism. - Stephen J. Gould, "Ontogeny and Phylogeny," Belknap Press: Cambridge MA, 1977, pp.77-78)."


Robert E.D. Clark in his work Darwin: Before and After wrote concerning Hitler's evolutionary racism: "The Germans were the higher race, destined for a glorious evolutionary future. For this reason it was essential that the Jews should be segregated, otherwise mixed marriages would take place. Were this to happen, all nature’s efforts 'to establish an evolutionary higher stage of being may thus be rendered futile' (Mein Kampf). "


Hitler wrote in Mein Kampf:


"The stronger must dominate and not blend with the weaker, thus sacrificing his own greatness. Only the born weakling can view this as cruel, but he, after all, is only a weak and limited man; for if this law did not prevail, any conceivable higher development (Hoherentwicklung) of organic living beings would be unthinkable."


Dr. Robert E.D. Clark wrote in his work Darwin, Before and After the following regarding Hitler and the theory of evolution: "Adolf Hitler’s mind was captivated by evolutionary teaching — probably since the time he was a boy. Evolutionary ideas — quite undisguised — lie at the basis of all that is worst in Mein Kampf — and in his public speeches".

Richard Dawkins is a prominent atheist and evolutionist. Richard Dawkins stated in an interview: "What’s to prevent us from saying Hitler wasn’t right? I mean, that is a genuinely difficult question."[15]

"It is perhaps no coincidence that Adolf Hitler was a firm believer in and preacher of evolutionism. Whatever the deeper, profound, complexities of his psychosis, it is certain that [the concept of struggle was important for]. . . his book, Mein Kampf clearly set forth a number of evolutionary ideas, particularly those emphasizing struggle, survival of the fittest and extermination of the weak to produce a better society."


Noted evolutionary anthropologist Sir Arthur Keith conceded the following in regards to Hitler: "The German Fuhrer, as I have consistently maintained, is an evolutionist; he has consciously sought to make the practices of Germany conform to the theory of evolution"




HYPERLINK "http://www.conservapedia.com/Adolf_Hitler" \l "cite_note-17"


"


Evolutionist and atheistRichard Dawkins stated in an interview: "What’s to prevent us from saying Hitler wasn’t right? I mean, that is a genuinely difficult question." The interviewer wrote, regarding the Hitler comment, "I was stupefied. He had readily conceded that his own philosophical position did not offer a rational basis for moral judgments. His intellectual honesty was refreshing, if somewhat disturbing on this point." Adolf Hitler - Conservapedia



There is no end to a war of web sites. Hitler was insane and no doubt made many statements about many subjects. The issue is whether he ever used evolutionary principles to justify his actions and whether his actions are consistent with the implications of evolution. The first is true but don't think you will ever aknowledge it. The second is obvious whether you aknowledge it or not. Even Richard Dawkins (who knows more about the subject than you do apperantely) admits it (he is surprisingly candid at times)

"Social Darwinism is distinct from the biological theory of evolution, and only loosely connected with Charles Darwin, whom Hitler is not known to have ever mentioned. "

The social aspects or implications of evolution are not a seperate reality distinct from the theory. I don't care if Hitler mentioned Darwin's name. However no one can know that for sure but it is completely irrelevant.
 
Last edited:

1robin

Christian/Baptist
Yes, I know what you said, you made up stuff. That is clear and obvious.
I guess if a person screams at you that a dodge impalla is about to hit you, you will instead of moving examine the history of GM with this person. It's a stupid misdirection tactic probably derived from an inability to deal with the issue. The term I used is a description of a valid concept it was not used as the title of an official division of science and is absolutely true. I only withdrew it for the sake of dealing with the issue instead of the sidebar you were trying to start. Apparently this is impossible, you will assert the side issue and then never leave it regardless of it's uselessness.
 
Top