Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Jerry Coyne defends “Darwin’s heir” from accusations of racism

arroba Email

Unfocused claims of “racism” are a familiar Woke tactic for destroying careers and reputations and they are only beginning to hit Darwinians, so now we read:

Scientific American has hit rock bottom with this new op-ed that is nothing more than a hit piece on Ed Wilson, basically calling him a racist.

It is written by someone who apparently has no training in evolutionary biology, though she says she “intimately familiarized [herself] with Wilson’s work and his dangerous ideas on what factors influence human behavior.” I usually don’t question someone because of their credentials, but this piece is so stupid, so arrantly ignorant of Wilson’s work, that I can attribute its content only to a combination of ignorance (perhaps deliberate) or a woke desire to take down someone as a racist who wasn’t a racist. Or both.

In fact, the piece below could have been written by any social-justice ideologue, for its real aim is more than smearing Wilson; it;s also to change the nature of science

Jerry Coyne, “Scientific American does an asinine hit job on E. O. Wilson, calling him a racist” at Why Evolution Is True (December 30, 2021)

From the piece:

His influential text Sociobiology: The New Synthesis contributed to the false dichotomy of nature versus nurture and spawned an entire field of behavioral psychology grounded in the notion that differences among humans could be explained by genetics, inheritance and other biological mechanisms. Finding out that Wilson thought this way was a huge disappointment, because I had enjoyed his novel Anthill, which was published much later and written for the public.

Wilson was hardly alone in his problematic beliefs. His predecessors—mathematician Karl Pearson, anthropologist Francis Galton, Charles Darwin, Gregor Mendel and others—also published works and spoke of theories fraught with racist ideas about distributions of health and illness in populations without any attention to the context in which these distributions occur.

Monica R. McLemore, “The Complicated Legacy of E. O. Wilson” at Scientific American (December 29, 2021)

Sharp intake of breath here. Why didn’t anyone see all that before? Don’t say we didn’t warn them. All we got for our trouble was blather about Darwin opposing slavery, as if that were difficult when slavery had been abolished throughout the British Empire for most of his life. Imagine comparing Darwin to the brave white Americans who helped slaves escape despite the Fugitive Slave Laws!

But Coyne is right in thinking that the ultimate Woke goal is that “any social-justice ideologue” will rule over scientists:

I really can’t go on, except to add two things. First, McLemore herself is being unscientific in accusing “problematic” Ed Wilson of racism without mentioning one bit of evidence. And MENDEL??? There is no scholarship involved in this piece, and, in the end defaming Wilson seems like merely an excuse for McLemore to vent her ill-considered antiracist views of science on the readers of Scientific American.

Finally, the really problematic people today are not Ed Wilson; they are people like McLemore herself, who simply ignores evidence, makes misleading statements about scientists, and accuses science of being structurally racist in a way for which only she knows the cure. It is people like her who are not only defacing and distorting history, but trying to change the face of science from being a set of tools to investigate nature into a set of ideological practices to achieve Social Justice.

Jerry Coyne, “Scientific American does an asinine hit job on E. O. Wilson, calling him a racist” at Why Evolution Is True (December 30, 2021)

Yes, Jerry. Exactly.

Piano, piano, piano drop head. And you helped set the tone.

Sadly, the readers of Scientific American may be fighting tooth and claw to be first to lap it all up.

Some of us predict that most Darwinians will roll over and beg. They don’t really believe in truth anyway, not in an ultimate sense. They believe in what survives. And Woke is thriving just now compared with truth.

We’d like to be wrong. But let’s see.

You may also wish to read: “Darwin’s heir” E. O. Wilson remembered for ants; sociobiology is sidelined. Had Wilson’s career begun fifty years later, it would have been quickly and fatally Woked.

Chuckdarwin, "Good for Coyne. At least someone in the science establishment gets it…" One is forced to wonder when, or if, Chuckdarwin himself will ever 'get it'? The subtitle of Darwin's 'Origin of Species' is "the preservation of favored races in the struggle for life." In Darwin’s subsequent book, "The Descent of Man", Charles Darwin explicitly stated,
"At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes, as Professor Schaaffhausen has remarked, will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the negro or Australian and the gorilla" - Charles Darwin, The Descent of Man, 1874, p. 178 “Not only does Darwin believe in white supremacy, he offers a biological explanation for it, namely that white people are further evolved. He writes that the “western nations of Europe … now so immeasurably surpass their former savage progenitors and stand at the summit of civilization” (178). Darwin imagines that Europeans are more advanced versions of the rest of the world. As previously mentioned, this purported superiority justified to Darwin the domination of inferior races by Europeans. As white Europeans “exterminate and replace” the world’s “savage races,” and as great apes go extinct, Darwin says that the gap between civilized man and his closest evolutionary ancestor will widen. The gap will eventually be between civilized man “and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as at present between the negro or Australian and the gorilla” (201). Read that last line again if you missed it: Darwin’s theory claims that Africans and Australians are more closely related to apes than Europeans are. The spectrum of organisms is a hierarchy here, with white Europeans at the top and apes at the bottom. In Darwin’s theory, colored people fall somewhere in between. Modern human is essentially restricted only to white Europeans, with all other races viewed as somehow sub-human…” … “Now I understand why I’ve never been asked in a biology class to read the original text of Darwin’s theories: Our contemporary reverence for Darwin’s gentlemanliness and the pure scientific brilliance of his theories is an overly optimistic illusion that shatters upon a closer look at his publications.” - Austin Anderson, “The Dark Side of Darwinism” - An Academic Discovers The “Dark Side” Of Darwinism - Nov. 2020 https://uncommondesc.wpengine.com/darwinism/an-academic-discovers-the-dark-side-of-darwinism/
Racism is literally built into the supposedly 'scientific' foundation of Darwinian thinking!
Darwinism and “No Lives Matter” -June 25, 2020 Excerpt: As Professor Weikart explains, Darwin’s racism is not incidental to his case for evolution. It’s not as if he was merely a product of his time, with the reprehensible attitudes held by other upper class Brits when he wrote his books. Yes, he was anti-slavery. And yes, he embodied the racism that came before him. He didn’t invent it. But he also used it as “evidence” for his theory. He believed that different races of humans represented biological variations (in intelligence, moral capacity, and more) on which the natural selection process could work, just as it could on finch beaks. His conclusion of a racial hierarchy with Africans at the bottom, his projection of eventual racial “extermination,” were no stray inference. The documentaries Human Zoos and The Biology of the Second Reich show how Darwinian theory continued to motivate racism, eugenic drives, and genocide into the 20th century. Not a Bug but a Feature Weikart continues by noting that later Darwinists (such as Peter Singer) drew logical consequences from evolution, including that since all human beings are the product of random natural forces, they possess no special dignity. Human life is not precious. Or to put it another way, via John Zmirak: NO LIVES MATTER. By contrast, the religious traditions that evolutionary theory pushes aside possess ample reason for respecting humans universally as equals, of identical value and dignity, no matter the color of their skin. Of course, there have been “religious” racists. But that is a contradiction with their professed faith. Those who call for vandalizing churches because of depictions of a “white” Jesus don’t understand this. https://evolutionnews.org/2020/06/darwinism-and-no-lives-matter/
And the 'scientific' racism engendered by Darwin's theory was not without consequence.
Darwin’s bodysnatchers: new horrors Excerpt: People deliberately killed to provide ‘specimens’ for evolutionary research In a previous Creation magazine we related evidence that perhaps 10,000 dead bodies of Australia’s Aboriginal people were shipped to British museums in a frenzied attempt to prove the widespread belief that they were the ‘missing link’. US evolutionists were also strongly involved in this flourishing ‘industry’ of gathering specimens of ‘subhumans’. The Smithsonian Institution in Washington holds the remains of 15,000 individuals of various races. Pickled Aboriginal brains were also in demand, to try to prove that they were inferior to those of whites. It was Darwin, after all, who wrote that the civilized races would inevitably wipe out such lesser-evolved ‘savage’ ones. A death-bed memoir from Korah Wills, who became mayor of Bowen, Queensland in 1866,4 graphically describes how he killed and dismembered a local tribesman in 1865 to provide a scientific specimen. Forty-five heads were then boiled down and the 10 best skulls were packed off for overseas. http://creation.mobi/darwins-bodysnatchers-new-horrors
The horror unleashed on the world by Darwin's 'scientific' racism is hard to exaggerate.
“One general law, leading to the advancement of all organic beings, namely, multiply, vary, let the strongest live and the weakest die.” – Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species “A stronger race will oust that which has grown weak; for the vital urge, in its ultimate form, will burst asunder all the absurd chains of this so-called humane consideration for the individual and will replace it with the humanity of Nature, which wipes out what is weak in order to give place to the strong.” – Adolf Hitler – Mein Kampf – Chapter 4 The Role Of Darwinism In Nazi Racial Thought - Richard Weikart - October 2013 Excerpt: The historical evidence is overwhelming that human evolution was an integral part of Nazi racial ideology. http://www.csustan.edu/history/faculty/weikart/darwinism-in-nazi-racial-thought.pdf Hitler, Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Mao – quotes - Foundational Darwinian influence in their political ideologies July 2020 https://uncommondesc.wpengine.com/intelligent-design/michael-egnor-on-the-relationship-between-darwinism-and-totalitarianism/#comment-707831 The Theory of Evolution and 20th century Totalitarian Regimes - Paul Gosselin (May - 2021) http://www.samizdat.qc.ca/cosmos/sc_soc/sc_po/EvolutionandTotalitarianRegimes_PG.htm Atheism’s Body Count * It is obvious that Atheism cannot be true; for if it were, it would produce a more humane world, since it values only this life and is not swayed by the foolish beliefs of primitive superstitions and religions. However, the opposite proves to be true. Rather than providing the utopia of idealism, it has produced a body count second to none. With recent documents uncovered for the Maoist and Stalinist regimes, it now seems the high end of estimates of 250 million dead (between 1900-1987) are closer to the mark. The Stalinist Purges produced 61 million dead and Mao’s Cultural Revolution produced 70 million casualties. These murders are all upon their own people! This number does not include the countless dead in their wars of outward aggression waged in the name of the purity of atheism’s world view. China invades its peaceful, but religious neighbor, Tibet; supports N. Korea in its war against its southern neighbor and in its merciless oppression of its own people; and Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge kill up to 6 million with Chinese support. All of these actions done “in the name of the people” to create a better world. - Atheism’s Tendency Towards Totalitarianism Rather Than Freedom What is so strange and odd that in spite of their outward rejection of religion and all its superstitions, they feel compelled to set up cults of personality and worship of the State and its leaders that is so totalitarian that the leaders are not satisfied with mere outward obedience; rather they insist on total mind control and control of thoughts, ideas and beliefs. They institute Gulags and “re-education” centers to indoctrinate anyone who even would dare question any action or declaration of the “Dear Leader.” Even the Spanish Inquisition cannot compare to the ruthlessness and methodical efficiency of these programs conducted on so massive a scale. While proclaiming freedom to the masses, they institute the most methodical efforts to completely eliminate freedom from the people, and they do so all “on behalf” of the proletariat. A completely ordered and totally unfree totalitarian State is routinely set up in place of religion, because it is obviously so profoundly better society. It is also strange that Stalin was a seminarian who rejected Christianity and went on to set up himself as an object of worship. It seems that impulse to religious devotion is present in all, whether that be in traditional forms or secular inventions. https://www.scholarscorner.com/atheisms-body-count-ideology-and-human-suffering/
And despite the constant denials of Darwinists to the contrary, racism is still very much a integral part of Darwinian thinking. To clearly prove this point all I have to do is point out, (In virtually all artistic renditions of human evolution that Darwinists offer to the general public in museums and elsewhere), that the evolution of humanity is, almost always, invariably portrayed as an upward progress from dark to white.
Human Evolution as a “Path to Whiteness” - November 24, 2021 Excerpt: Do Your Own Google Search I had never thought of this before. In contemporary museum displays and other evolutionary depictions, just as in Darwin’s Descent of Man and in the notorious Civic Biology textbook that was at issue in the 1925 Scopes Trial, human origins are portrayed as an upward progress from dark to white. Neanderthals, however otherwise “primitive” (which is questionable in itself), are shown as light-skinned. And maybe they were, but modern man — Homo sapiens — is almost invariably white and European, not African or Asian. Check out some examples from around the Internet, here, here, here, here, and here. (links on site) Do a Google image search for the phrase “human evolution” and you’ll see many others. Just a coincidence? Or is Darwin’s racist legacy still with us today? You tell me. For a deeper exploration of that legacy, see John West’s documentary Human Zoos. https://evolutionnews.org/2021/11/human-evolution-as-a-path-to-whiteness/
Galatians 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
On twitter, at least, there has been a lot of mocking of the SciAm piece, for being so awful. I'd imagine the general reaction of evolutionary biologists to that piece will be "wut?". Bob O'H
Good for Coyne. At least someone in the science establishment gets it... chuckdarwin
Sucker for punishment that I am, I still read SciAm every month. But my subscription expires in May and I am not renewing it. Every new issue seems to have a larger percentage of woke clap-trap that sets my blood a-boil as I pull out my pen to mark up the nonsense. This began over a decade ago, but could be tolerated (sort of) until the fall of 2020 when they became full political, with no semblance of balance. Fasteddious

Leave a Reply