Darwin Debated: Religion vs. Evolution

[bispo]

Almost 150 years after Charles Darwin published his groundbreaking work On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, Americans are still fighting over evolution. If anything, the controversy has recently grown in both size and intensity. In the last five years alone, for example, debates over how evolution should be taught in public

Comments

[ex_lost_kit]

Uh, social darwinism, in the sense that human ideas and social structures are subject to natural selection, was hardly discredited as all.

Ever heard of "memes"? Do you believe they exist? Then, by this definition, you're a social darwinist.

[textualdeviance]

Social Darwinism doesn't exist. All we have are misanthropes who want to take active control of large systems in order to have power over other people.

But then again, you know that, being one of the people in question.

[ex_lost_kit]

All we have are misanthropes who want to take active control of large systems in order to have power over other people.

And that's Darwinism.

But I'm anything but. You're the one who favors concentrated power.

[textualdeviance]

And that's Darwinism.

Um, no, it's not. Being a manipulative psychopath who acts out of personal interest instead of the interests of the species as a whole makes an individual a rogue, who, under most circumstances in the wild, would be killed by the tribe.

And I favor collective power in order to do exactly that: Control rogue individuals so they don't bring down the entire species.

[ex_lost_kit]

Being a manipulative psychopath who acts out of personal interest instead of the interests of the species as a whole makes an individual a rogue, who, under most circumstances in the wild, would be killed by the tribe.

Who cares? It's Darwinism. It doesn't mean that it's good, it means that a selective pressure has been exerted.

And I favor collective power in order to do exactly that: Control rogue individuals so they don't bring down the entire species.

Right, because the history of "collective power" has been great as preventing that. Pol Pot, Castro, Stalin... all protecting us from the evil capitalists.

[textualdeviance]

Totalitarianism is not collective power. And it's impossible in a democracy. So long as our Constitution is in effect, and it's one person = one vote, we're in no danger at all from the rash actions of a dictator.

Don't get angry because the rest of the pack doesn't like you. That's not fascism. It's things working as they should to keep mad dogs from tearing apart everyone else.

[navy]

It seems that there is some confusion about what "Selection" means. There is natural selection, which is what Darwin postulated, and there is artificial (unnatural) selection which has been around for as long as humanity has domesticated and bred animals. Historically, "Social Darwinism" has been used to describe people who believe that humans can be improved with selective breeding, a la eugenics.

[ex_lost_kit]

And that's been discredited? We can't improve people through breeding?

[navy]

Why don't you ask Hitler?

[anthraxpretzels]

I dunno, why don't you ask your friends on 4chan?