Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

What role did “evolution” play in Dylann Roof’s motives?

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

Readers will long be haunted by the memory of the 21-year-old gunman who opened fire earlier this month in a historic, mainly African American church in Charleston, South Carolina, killing nine.

David Klinghoffer, at Evolution News & Views, offers the following:

Dylann Roof’s apparent “manifesto” deals a little with themes of pseudo-scientific racism:

Negroes have lower [IQs], lower impulse control, and higher testosterone levels in generals. These three things alone are a recipe for violent behavior. If a scientist publishes a paper on the differences between the races in Western Europe or Americans, he can expect to lose his job. There are personality traits within human families, and within different breeds of cats or dogs, so why not within the races?

A horse and a donkey can breed and make a mule, but they are still two completely different animals. Just because we can breed with the other races doesnt make us the same.

But beyond that there was none of the evolutionary chatter you find at some neo-Nazi and white supremacist sites. Now, though, the mainstream media are rejoicing at the revelation that a racist group that evidently inspired Roof is headed by a man who is also a donor to Republican candidates.

But, more significantly,

When I read these articles, I noted that the official spokesman for Holt’s group is a person called Jared Taylor, best known for leading another, slightly more polished white nationalist web publication, American Renaissance. These organizations have their different emphases and preoccupations. While the Council of Conservative Citizens is obsessed by “black-on-white” crime, American Renaissance has as one of its specialties science-flavored, notably evolutionary, justifications for racism. In the media coverage I’ve seen, the latter fact has gone unmentioned. More.

Not really a surprise, actually. Modern racism is Darwinian in character. Growing up in Canada, I (O’Leary for News, b. 1950) didn’t run into much full-blown racism (as distinct from lots of ethnic grievance-mongering, driven more by grief or self-pity than hatred). But the racism I did hear was fully Darwinian in the sense of survival of the fittest, superior genetic pools, etc.

Significantly, these concepts were largely unknown to the general public before Darwinism began to be taught in the schools. The new concepts certainly did not create racism but they lent it the respectability of science. Thus, not surprisingly, there is indeed an “evolution” component to many North American mass murders.

The Darwin-in-the-schools lobby has made sure that the only proposed form of evolution most people in North America are even familiar with is Darwinism (natural selection acting on random mutations, roughly translated—with Darwin’s approval—as “survival of the fittest”). So we can bet that when apparent mass murderers say “evolution,” they mean Darwinian evolution, and not any other kind.

Worse, Darwinism is not like other evolution theories. The fact that Darwin was—like most Brit gents of his day—a racist often obscures the fact that race theory is not incidental to his theory of speciation, it is fundamental.

It explains, just for example, the need to heavily weight the balance in favour of Neanderthal man being a separate human species, with the usual easy speculation as to why the Neanderthals “died out,” as opposed to just being assimilated by waves of later migrants, as the genomic data suggest. Separate human species are needed to prop up the theory, and races are supposed to be heading toward speciation.

One factor that prevents any constructive discussion of these matters is that the legislators one would expect to be most concerned about racism, on account of the support visible minorities give them, also market Darwinism to their campus progressive base—presumably hoping (perhaps with good cause) that their much larger minority base will never find out how much their favoured candidates are in the tank for Darwin.

It would be an act of decency and fairness on the part of a person they trust to let them know. Don’t expect any legacy medium to confront these politicians about it.

And all the while, constructive understandings of evolution, that do not involve any racist assumptions—and are indeed contrary to them (horizontal gene transfer, epigenetics, etc)—go unexplored.

Which is why I say: Stop all teaching of Darwinism in the schools now. Or else, teach it in context, giving significant time for evidence-based approaches to evolution.

See also: Neanderthal Man: The long-lost relative turns up again, this time with documents

Follow UD News at Twitter!

Comments
Ten days of furious Googling! And after so many desperate searches for every permutation of “Dylann”. “Roof”, “Darwin”. “Evolution”, “Natural”, “Selection”, “Finches” and “Barnacles” etc. by the management and (pro-ID) community, during which time, the deaths of nine innocent human beings apparently merited no mention whatsoever – this is all you can now come up with
Yeah, not worth mentioning until a link (regardless of how tenuous or dubious) to Darwinism could be found. It looks like it took a while. But I figured eventually they'd find something on par with, "The former room-mate of the third cousin of Dylann's second grade teacher...", and that would be enough for someone to say "It’s sad that innocent church-goers were brutally attacked because of that kind of Darwinian thinking."goodusername
June 28, 2015
June
06
Jun
28
28
2015
07:00 PM
7
07
00
PM
PDT
Ten days of furious Googling! And after so many desperate searches for every permutation of "Dylann". "Roof", "Darwin". "Evolution", "Natural", "Selection", "Finches" and "Barnacles" etc. by the management and (pro-ID) community, during which time, the deaths of nine innocent human beings apparently merited no mention whatsoever - this is all you can now come up with: An ENV article and a manifest which features only two of the search terms ("Dylann" and "Roof") you so desperately wanted to find.steveh
June 28, 2015
June
06
Jun
28
28
2015
03:34 PM
3
03
34
PM
PDT
The racial elements in Charles Darwin's writing, the eugenicist implications, are often brushed aside as ugly but incidental, a mere byproduct of his time and place. Yet the myth of European superiority over inferior dark peoples continues to percolate in some evolutionary thinking, a century and more after the close of the Victorian era. It seems to have found an eager student in a disturbed young man named Dylann Roof.
It's sad that innocent church-goers were brutally attacked because of that kind of Darwinian thinking. But it's not suprising. We see evidence of similar thought here on UD all the time where evolutionists cannot even understand that their theory is destructive of moral standards in general. The outrage we hear when some fairy obvious facts are mentioned is at best, the product of very shallow thinking and more likely just totally bogus. If you're going to pretend to be a theist, just admit it.Silver Asiatic
June 28, 2015
June
06
Jun
28
28
2015
01:28 PM
1
01
28
PM
PDT
Evolution is propaganda.Mapou
June 28, 2015
June
06
Jun
28
28
2015
12:55 PM
12
12
55
PM
PDT
This article is propaganda.Carpathian
June 28, 2015
June
06
Jun
28
28
2015
12:49 PM
12
12
49
PM
PDT
Roy:
Recurrent low.
It's obviously striking a very sensitive nerve. It's fun to watch. I say, hit the Darwinists and the other brain-dead atheists with every arrow in the quiver. Give them a taste of their own medicine.Mapou
June 28, 2015
June
06
Jun
28
28
2015
12:42 PM
12
12
42
PM
PDT
Recurrent low.Roy
June 28, 2015
June
06
Jun
28
28
2015
12:25 PM
12
12
25
PM
PDT
"What role did “evolution” play in Dylann Roof’s motives?" None. Did the slavers in Charleston or the segregationists that followed cite Darwin? Did Roof? Darwin didn't invent racism or slavery. And Origins wasn't the text used in the South to defend either. The Bible was. http://www.shilohtrenton.org/shilohvideo/sermonnotes/SERMON%20BIBLE%20SLAVERY%2011-06-11.pdfREC
June 28, 2015
June
06
Jun
28
28
2015
10:28 AM
10
10
28
AM
PDT
Lee Spetner
The teaching of neo-Darwinian evolution must stop because it lacks any scientific support. My latest book, The Evolution Revolution, shows this in detail and offers another theory that accounts for all the evolution the Darwinian theory cannot. It is outrageous that neo-Darwinian evolution is taught as if it were science.
No, what's outrageous is all the physicists, engineers, computer programmers, lawyers, surgeons, plumbers whatever who think they understand biology better than biologists. If they're so damned smart and think it's so damned easy then why didn't they go into it instead of becoming physicists, engineers, lawyers, etc? Of course, if you have a bunch of biologists tearing into physics for the sterility of string theory or pointless multiverse speculations then at least you can go for a tu quoque I suppose.Seversky
June 28, 2015
June
06
Jun
28
28
2015
10:22 AM
10
10
22
AM
PDT
New low.wd400
June 28, 2015
June
06
Jun
28
28
2015
10:13 AM
10
10
13
AM
PDT
What role did “evolution” play in Dylann Roof’s motives?
I was just waiting for that one to appear. According to his step-mother, he was brought up in a religious home, so what role did religion play in this killing?Seversky
June 28, 2015
June
06
Jun
28
28
2015
10:08 AM
10
10
08
AM
PDT
I think this paragraph from Kinghofer's piece is worth quoting:
Guilt by association is a nasty business. It's often very selective, too. It leaves things out that don't fit the desired narrative.
Bob O'H
June 28, 2015
June
06
Jun
28
28
2015
07:46 AM
7
07
46
AM
PDT
Hahaha! Took a few days. Has there been a mass killing you people haven't spun to demonise the opposition?
Modern racism is Darwinian in character
Only if you are as clueless as your average white-supremacist as to what 'Darwinian' selection actually means.Hangonasec
June 28, 2015
June
06
Jun
28
28
2015
07:39 AM
7
07
39
AM
PDT
Are separate human species really necessary to prop up the theory? I would have thought that a one-human-species scenario could be just as likely under "Darwinism". For example, if geography had been such that it was impossible for groups to split off and become reproductively isolated.daveS
June 28, 2015
June
06
Jun
28
28
2015
06:59 AM
6
06
59
AM
PDT
Dr. Spetner, having received a PhD in physics from MIT in 1950, you might find this recent study interesting:
Babies are born with a grasp of physics, researchers claim - April 2015 Babies have an innate understanding of the way the world works and will pay more attention to objects if they appear to defy the basic laws of physics, a pioneering study has found.,,, The findings support the contention that humans are born with some kind of core knowledge about how things should work which acts as a template on which babies begin to learn about the world around them, the scientists said. “Our research suggests that infants use what they already know about the world to form predictions. When these predictions are shown to be wrong, infants use this as a special opportunity for learning,” said Lisa Feigenson, a psychologist at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore.,,, The study looked at the way 11-month-old babies responded to seeing a ball apparently rolling through a solid wall. In another experiment, a toy car could be seen rolling off a ledge into mid-air without falling. On both occasions, the gaze of the babies became significantly longer compared to parallel tests where the ball and toy car did what the babies expected and were stopped by the wall or fell to the floor respectively. The study also found that when surprised in this way, the babies were more likely to become interested in the objects. They would bang the ball for instance against a surface as if to test its solidity, while they would drop the car to see if it fell to the floor. The observations support the idea that when babies are surprised by something that goes against their core knowledge, they used it as a chance to learn more about the world, Professor Feigenson said. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/babies-are-born-with-a-grasp-of-physics-researchers-claim-10153133.html
a friend of mine on facebook commented:
This is what intrigued me: Our daughter, who will get married n 2 weeks, while she was in Mom's womb, responded adversely to stimuli. We were at a hospital getting a sonogram. We saw her clearly. A nurse nserted a needle through Mom's belly and into the sac in order to draw fluid and do testing. As soon as the needle entered the sac, that baby quickly huddled over away from it. That kid sensed something foreign and moved away. Babies are sentient beings.
bornagain77
June 28, 2015
June
06
Jun
28
28
2015
06:56 AM
6
06
56
AM
PDT
Yes, and when the smoke clears, Dr. Spetner, I will get back to your book. Currently, it is the social damage I have been focusing on. I am especially concerned by the perpetration of this damage by persons one would have expected to take a quite different view.News
June 28, 2015
June
06
Jun
28
28
2015
05:55 AM
5
05
55
AM
PDT
The teaching of neo-Darwinian evolution must stop because it lacks any scientific support. My latest book, The Evolution Revolution, shows this in detail and offers another theory that accounts for all the evolution the Darwinian theory cannot. It is outrageous that neo-Darwinian evolution is taught as if it were science.Lee Spetner
June 28, 2015
June
06
Jun
28
28
2015
05:24 AM
5
05
24
AM
PDT
1 2

Leave a Reply