"Expelled" movie

FelixC said:
1) man selected seeds & animals to plant as the beginning of agriculture, but not always as well-thought out plans
not sure they understood genetics until Mendel, I don't think that people got serious until then (my opinion)
Click to expand...
It may not have been well understood but it has been practiced for thousands of years. Darwin discusses it in Origin of Species.

FelixC said:
2) that implies causality, I think that you may want to word it a little different, since "nature" in your statement is "active" & I think you meant to imply that its "blind" or "neutral" (am I reading to much into it?)
Click to expand...
I was pointing that humans selectively breeding based on what they perceive to be superior traits is very different from natural selection. Therefore the Nazis were not applying evolutionary principals.
 
Archie said:
By the way, the link from 'evolution' to the eugenics program of the NAZI regime is very clear and direct.........eugenics is the concept of applying evolutionary principles to humanity.
Click to expand...

You are 100% wrong on this - probably because you don't understand evolution so its not your fault.

Quick lesson:

Evolutionary theory teaches us that the way to ensure that a species has the best chance to thrive and survive is through the genetic diversity present in a population, and that we can never be certain as to which traits will turn out in the future to be most conducive to survival.
Eugenics effectively breeds out diversity - therefore it is anti-evolution.

any questions?
 
synthesizer-patel said:
1. You are 100% wrong on this - probably because you don't understand evolution so its not your fault.
2. Eugenics effectively breeds out diversity - therefore it is anti-evolution.

any questions?
Click to expand...
S-P: I think that the problem here is with terms
1. Social Darwinists thought they were at the top of the ladder, therefore eugenics naturally came from them, Margeret Sanger from Planned Parenthood devised that program to help rid America of undesirables
2. early SD's did not understand evolution as such, I think Charles Darwim may not have understood it correctly, being he did not have access to electron microscopes & other modern gadgets & techniques
 
archie said:
The main thrust of the movie is the shunning and suppression of any mention of ID in any honest manner.
Click to expand...
So the main thrust of the movie is bullshit. OK.

I mean, have you checked out what the ID folks are claiming ?! You can't sneak that stuff into peer-reviewed journals of actual science - sure there's a conspiracy against it: it's called requiring rigor and logical consistency. It's a virtue.
Felix said:
1. Social Darwinists thought they were at the top of the ladder, therefore eugenics naturally came from them,
Click to expand...
Anyone who thinks they are at the top of some kind of ladder is badly confused about evolutionary theory.

Any parasites you have are further up the evolutionary ladder than you are - just for one example.

And then to top it off, some of them tried to exterminate the most successful demographic group they had in their civilization - that doesn't even make sense from the Social Darwinist perspective.
 
FelixC said:
S-P: I think that the problem here is with terms
1. Social Darwinists thought they were at the top of the ladder, therefore eugenics naturally came from them, Margeret Sanger from Planned Parenthood devised that program to help rid America of undesirables
2. early SD's did not understand evolution as such, I think Charles Darwim may not have understood it correctly, being he did not have access to electron microscopes & other modern gadgets & techniques
Click to expand...

Social Darwinism is a political beleif held by the christian right - so your point is meaningless
 
synthesizer-patel said:
Social Darwinism is a political beleif held by the christian right - so your point is meaningless
Click to expand...
Nah, Social Darwinism is a legit theory of Sociology. The only discredit I can think of is the fact that it makes generalizations about groups of people (this is common in sociology), whereas the evolutionary Darwinist theories for nature are backed by more 'scientific' observations of creatures less complex than humans.
 
Elucinatus said:
Nah, Social Darwinism is a legit theory of Sociology. The only discredit I can think of is the fact that it makes generalizations about groups of people (this is common in sociology), whereas the evolutionary Darwinist theories for nature are backed by more 'scientific' observations of creatures less complex than humans.
Click to expand...

legit socialogical theory or not - its one commonly held by people in the religious right - listen to Limbaugh, Fallwell, Hagger, etc some time - they are all social darwinists
 
I suppose so. Hitler was a big fan of Social Darwinism.

I myself also place a lot of value on Social Darwinism, but I still vandalize and steal from churches every other weekend.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top