Social Darwinism

[ImmortalFlame]

This is why I'm not in agreement with social darwinism.

This guy basically doesn't understand evolution, and confuses biological imperatives and the concept of "social Darwinism" and personal goals. He takes it as literally true that Darwinism is about simply survival and assumes this need - if Darwinism were true - would pervade every aspect of our lives in a clear and direct way, but doesn't understand that this doesn't necessarily mean that individual organisms can't have other goals, because survival is the biological aim of the process, not the individual. It's the equivalent of saying "if gravity is literally true, why do people sometimes jump upwards?"

It's quite fitting that the thumbnail for the video is a heavily manipulated image of Richard Dawkins designed to make him look insidious and mean. Ultimately, that's all he has - a deliberate manipulation of the facts in order to con people into viewing evolution as some sort of cartoonish boogeyman.

 

[Polymath257]

This is why I'm not in agreement with social darwinism.

Necro a thread much? The video completely misunderstands the whole Darwinian model.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Necro a thread much?.

Cor, blimey Batman! I didn't even realize that the last post in this thread before Mohsen's was from 2004!

Did we even have internet back then? I'm surprised the posts aren't written in stone tablets.

Incidentally, I feel old.

 

[Audie]

If you agree with evolution, are you a supporter of Social Darwinism as well?
If not then why?

AKA, if you are a Christian, do you support the Crusades?
Spanish Inquisition?

 

[Audie]

I don't agree with evolution. But I think the title of Darwin's book sheds light on the question: On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life

According to g90 10/22 p. 27: The Columbia History of the World speaks about the “reawakening of Social Darwinism in the ideologies of the Fascists, expressed both by Mussolini and by Hitler.”
The Encyclopedia of the Third Reich agrees with this appraisal, explaining that social Darwinism was “the ideology behind Hitler’s policy of genocide.” In harmony with the teachings of Darwinian evolution, “German ideologists argued that the modern state, instead of devoting its energy to protecting the weak, should reject its inferior population in favor of the strong, healthy elements.” They argued that war is normal in the struggle for survival of the fittest, that “victory goes to the strong, and the weak must be eliminated.”

Thus, social Dawinism is yet another terrible (but logical) fruitage of this baseless doctrine of evolution, in my opinion.​

Godwin!! You are out.

 

[dfnj]

If you agree with evolution, are you a supporter of Social Darwinism as well?
If not then why?

Social Darwinism is not as effective as Libertarianism in politics. Political correctness is important. Like the latest "Clean Air Act" which eliminates all the air pollution regulations.

 

[Thermos aquaticus]

Social Darwinism is not as effective as Libertarianism in politics. Political correctness is important. Like the latest "Clean Air Act" which eliminates all the air pollution regulations.

I much prefer Social Newtonism. Since Newton's Laws state that what goes up must come down it only makes sense to push people off of tall buildings.

 

[dfnj]

I much prefer Social Newtonism. Since Newton's Laws state that what goes up must come down it only makes sense to push people off of tall buildings.

Newton's laws were suspended on 9/11. The buildings fell at free-fall speed regardless of opposing forces.