Culture Darwinism Intelligent Design Racism

Attack on Darwinism at AAAS’s flagship mag “Science” re racism and sexism

Spread the love

Yes, it’s sort of like the space aliens landed but this one is real:

Today, students are taught Darwin as the “father of evolutionary theory,” a genius scientist. They should also be taught Darwin as an English man with injurious and unfounded prejudices that warped his view of data and experience. Racists, sexists, and white supremacists, some of them academics, use concepts and statements “validated” by their presence in “Descent” as support for erroneous beliefs, and the public accepts much of it uncritically.

“The Descent of Man” is one of the most influential books in the history of human evolutionary science. We can acknowledge Darwin for key insights but must push against his unfounded and harmful assertions. Reflecting on “Descent” today one can look to data demonstrating unequivocally that race is not a valid description of human biological variation, that there is no biological coherence to “male” and “female” brains or any simplicity in biological patterns related to gender and sex, and that “survival of the fittest” does not accurately represent the dynamics of evolutionary processes. The scientific community can reject the legacy of bias and harm in the evolutionary sciences by recognizing, and acting on, the need for diverse voices and making inclusive practices central to evolutionary inquiry. In the end, learning from “Descent” illuminates the highest and most interesting problem for human evolutionary studies today: moving toward an evolutionary science of humans instead of “man.”

Agustín Fuentes , ““The Descent of Man,” 150 years on” at Science

Fine. Let’s pass over the question of why Cool People never noticed that stuff about Charles Darwin for nearly a century and a half.

Noticing now? Good. Then what does Agustín Fuentes suppose should replace Darwinism? A war on science? A war on math? A war on people who think getting right answers is a good thing? What’s supposed to be the next step?

Let’s see what is allowed to be published in Science about On the Origin of Species, the central Darwinian text.

By the way, Agustin Fuentes seems, from his site, linked at his name, to be mainly interested in the evolution of religion.

11 Replies to “Attack on Darwinism at AAAS’s flagship mag “Science” re racism and sexism

  1. 1
    EDTA says:

    >>that there is no biological coherence to “male” and “female” brains or any simplicity in biological patterns related to gender and sex…”

    Well, he certainly covered his politically-correct bases there. I’m also not sure it made any sense either. No patterns related to gender or sex? He should talk to Jerry “binary” Coyne… https://uncommondescent.com/biology/jerry-coyne-takes-a-stand-sex-is-binary/

  2. 2
    Seversky says:

    The scientific community can reject the legacy of bias and harm in the evolutionary sciences by recognizing, and acting on, the need for diverse voices and making inclusive practices central to evolutionary inquiry. In the end, learning from “Descent” illuminates the highest and most interesting problem for human evolutionary studies today: moving toward an evolutionary science of humans instead of “man.”

    He has a point. We need to find ways to embrace diversity. If we don’t, if human societies fragment into ‘tribal’ groups, based on an instinctive and primitive suspicion of that which is different, then we are heading for an even more troubled future.

  3. 3
    BobRyan says:

    No differences in the male and female brain? Plenty of studies have proven distinct differences between the male and female brain, since estrogen and testosterone produce different effects on the brain. Estrogen produces more white matter than testosterone and testosterone produces more gray matter than estrogen. The differences between gray and white matter are vast without impacting intelligence.

    Women and men think differently. White matter enables more connections to be made. Gray matter creates a more organized brain. Women tend to make better multitaskers than men, but not always going to be the case. Women use about 3 times the amount of words to say the same thing as men, due to the differences between gray and white matter.

    Race, unlike sex, has no bearing on anything.

  4. 4
    polistra says:

    Seversky, we are fragmenting BECAUSE we are forced to embrace diversity. It’s not accidental. It’s part of the Alinsky blueprint.

    Real diversity happens when people of different types are allowed to have separate spaces and separate jobs and separate roles in society.

  5. 5
    EvilSnack says:

    And more to the point, when a top-down authority becomes the final arbiter of the proper division of success and wealth, such that one person’s gain is always another person’s loss, animosity is baked into the system and there is no escaping us-versus-them thinking. The people who impose “diversity” are self-styled firemen pouring gasoline on the fire.

  6. 6
    EDTA says:

    >We need to find ways to embrace diversity.

    Well said, Polistra and others. Embracing diversity is emphasizing differences, rather than seeking common ground. We need unity, and people only get along when they share common morals. Unity does not come by emphasizing and celebrating differences.

  7. 7
    Seversky says:

    EDTA/6

    Embracing diversity is emphasizing differences, rather than seeking common ground. We need unity, and people only get along when they share common morals. Unity does not come by emphasizing and celebrating differences.

    Embracing diversity, for me, does not mean emphasizing differences. It means accepting them as just different, neither better nor worse, rather than using the differences to distance, demean or reject others just because they are different. Recognizing others as different does not take anything away from you.

    And unity in a diverse society ultimately can only arise from every member accepting all others as different individuals and groups and treating them as equally worthy of respect and fair treatment as themselves.

    It’s not a difficult concept in principle although it does seem to be in practice.

  8. 8
    AaronS1978 says:

    I’m just gonna sit here shove popcorn in my mouth and watch

    I’ve been saying the racist thing about Darwin for years almost 20 years now

    Part of me is very wary of the monstrous cancel culture that is about to start chewing on precious Darwin, but at the exact same time Darwin completely deserves it and so does everybody that freaking worshiped him

    It’s really too bad I don’t agree with the gender crap that this guy is trying to push in this paper

  9. 9
    polistra says:

    Reading Fuentes, I notice he considers Darwin’s opposition to slavery inconsistent with his aristocratic prejudices. It’s not inconsistent at all.

    Britain and Yankees opposed AGRARIAN slavery and serfdom because AGRARIAN slavery was a lifetime commitment by the employer. A master of serfs had to take care of the serfs while they lived. In return for his lifetime care, they gave him loyal labor. The British/Yankee version of sweatshop slavery required far more hours of work from the employees, and allowed the employer to discard them any time he wanted. Much more profitable and fun for the employer.

  10. 10
    EDTA says:

    No, diversity doesn’t take anything away from me. But it does mean there is already distance between us, and no, people can’t seem to handle that. Cultural differences aren’t that much of a struggle for many to accept, but stark moral differences are nearly always irreconcilable.

  11. 11
    Fasteddious says:

    The article says, “recognizing, and acting on the need for diverse voices and making inclusive practices central to evolutionary inquiry”. How about the diverse voice of ID in the Darwinian camp? How about the inclusive practice of listening to ID critique of Darwinism, and ideas about its true alternative? But of course, Darwinists are not open to that sort of inclusive and diverse practice. They just want to be woke rather than woken from their dreams of natural selection and their just-so story times.

Leave a Reply