Weikart has written a number of books in his long academic career on the links between Darwinism and malign social trends like elitism and racism. See, especially, Darwinian Racism: How Darwinism Influenced Hitler, Nazism, and White Nationalism.
Now a friend writes to say that in this recent lecture at the Royal Society, Adam Rutherford is saying similar things:
It’s nice when people start getting the story right.
For an instance of a bunch of people getting the story all wrong, see RichardWeikart on the non-religious racism that anti-racists ignore: “While researching my book, Darwinian Racism, I examined the websites and publications of many neo-Nazi, white nationalist, and alt-right individuals and organizations. What I discovered was that most white nationalists and white supremacists today embrace a social Darwinist version of scientific racism and vehemently oppose Christianity.”
We need to return to fair-minded objectivity in knowledge building, in education and in news and views media, also entertainment. This would also help to restore policy-making soundness.As it is, our civilisation is manifestly embarked on a voyage of folly as Plato warned against long since in The Republic.
Not by what I’ve read in a couple of other articles he’s had published.
And even if it were true that the Nazis took their inspiration primarily from Darwin – which I doubt – it still would not reflect on the scientific quality of Darwin’s seminal theory.
Seversky at 3,
What are you afraid of?
https://www.csustan.edu/history/was-hitler-influenced-darwinism
“…links between Darwinism and malign social trends like elitism and racism.”
True. It’s as true as “the shortest distance between two points is a straight line”.
There is also a link between Darwinism, racism, etc. and such illnesses as alcoholism, drug use, and gambling and sex addiction in that they share the same root of insanity.
People choose what they want to believe and Darwinism, racism, etc. and alcoholism etc. are both rooted in a choice people make to believe “something comes from nothing” or “there is no all-powerful, Intelligent Creator” or however else you want to express it.
It’s a choice people make by force of will rather than by logic and the point at which that decision is made is the point at which a person’s brain divides against itself and the person goes insane.
Recovery from such insanity begins when a person “comes to believe” that the simplest explanation for the existence of all there is “the God who is there”.
“And even if it were true that the Nazis took their inspiration primarily from Darwin – which I doubt – it still would not reflect on the scientific quality of Darwin’s seminal theory.“
I mean it is true that their motivation for finding the super race was based of Darwins seminal work.
And if we can ostracize Trump because some crazy crackhead racist said “I like trump” then we can certainly ostracize the scientist that created works that helps support racism and bigotry regularly.
I mean the theory supports interspecies and species competition right out of the gate
I really don’t even understand why people try to defend the old man. I think it’s because his teachings made it intellectually fulfilling for an atheist and if their hero is a giant piece of shit well how could they be intellectually fulfilled
You can be an atheist and hate this man to you don’t have to worry about being forced to believe in God or creator
His teachings were crap and they’re used to support crap even to this day Because honestly it’s philosophy it’s godless gaps is really what it is, with enough time anything can happen.
The theory is a giant catchall and is capable of explaining anything just like the multi-verse
Ya know I really never had an issue with evolution until the Dawkinites and their holy Darwinchrist was forced down my throat by his very insulting and vocal followers during college.
I view these atheists no differently then aggressive Mormons, Jehovah witness, or Scientologists. The only difference is I can’t seem to avoid the aggressive atheists the same way I can avoid the other three. I think they also call them selves “humanist” which makes me wanna puke in my mouth when I hear that name.
Seversky states: “And even if it were true that the Nazis took their inspiration primarily from Darwin – which I doubt – it still would not reflect on the scientific quality of Darwin’s seminal theory.”
No need for you to doubt Seversky, Hitler and the Nazis, as well as all the other murderous Atheistic tyrants of the 20th century, indeed took their quote-unquote ‘inspiration’ directly from Darwin’s theory.
And that is not even counting the untold millions, upon millions, of abortions worldwide.
In short, instead of ‘benefiting society’, as true science normally does for society, Darwin’s pseudo-scientific racist theory has only had unimaginably horrid consequences for man.
Verse and quote
And what is the body count for religious wars over the millennia?
Seversky, in case you missed it in my post at 8, “death as creator’ is central to your religion of Darwinism,
,,, Thus when Darwinists killed, and continue to kill, untold millions of their fellow citizens in their concentration camps, gulags and abortion industry, etc.. etc.., they were/are merely reflecting the image of their creator. i.e. death
Whereas in Christianity victory over death is central.
Thus when Christians champion pro-life legislation, open orphanages, feed the poor, build hospitals, etc.. etc.. they are merely reflecting the image of their creator, i.e. Life.
RR at 5,
If there is a line of evidence, actual evidence, then the only conclusion rational people can draw is that you’re 100% wrong. I’m talking about science, by which I don’t mean Darwinism.
AS1978 at 6,
“some crazy crackhead racist” Get a grip man.
AS1978 at 7,
Really? A little self-control if you don’t mind. I’m a moderator on another forum. I understand this sort of thing from time to time but don’t make it a trend.
Ba77 at 9,
And atheists attempt to convince others that religion was the worst killer. I know one person who is so convinced, but by the grace of God, he returned to the Church.
“In 1920, the Soviet Union became the first modern country to legalize abortion.[17] In 1933, during the Stalin era, views changed. In the Congress of Kiev in 1932, abortion was criticized for decreasing the country’s birth rate. Abortion was finally banned in 1933. In her book, “Sexual Politics”, the radical feminist Kate Millett criticized the Soviet regime for failing to support the social rights of women and homosexual people.[18] The number of officially recorded abortions dropped sharply from 1.9 million in 1935 to 570,000 in 1937, but began to climb just two years later, reaching 755,000 in 1939.[19] On November 23, 1955, the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet, under Nikita Khrushchev, legalized abortion. [20]”
Stalin was committed to acquiring as much land and resources as possible, so he attacked Poland, fought a proxy war in Spain, and attacked Finland. Of course, before the final bullets of World War II were fired, the Soviet Union became the mortal enemy of the West. The war against Germany saw the country divided in half just after the war, and he got Eastern Europe. So instead of fighting for their Freedom, and Eastern Europe getting its freedom, the Soviets got what they wanted.
Seversky
September 12, 2022 at 8:09 am
And what is the body count for religious wars over the millennia?
Funny I did the math for this a while back and if you add all the religious wars together including the 100 year war, it’s still doesn’t equate to the number of lives lost because of Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Moa, and Pol Pot.
So whatever the religious can do, atheists can do better, whatever the religious can atheists can do too.
And your group beat the hell out of the religious in the Genocidal maniac category, a Trophy you can gladly keep
@Relatd
Lead by example other then that put a sock in it
AaronS1978: Funny I did the math for this a while back and if you add all the religious wars together including the 100 year war, it’s still doesn’t equate to the number of lives lost because of Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Moa, and Pol Pot.
Try recalculating the numbers as percentages of the population at the time.
Also remember that during the crusades, for example, much of the killing was done at close range, personally, with the attacker getting doused in the blood and entrails of those they killed. All in the name of a loving and caring deity. Apparently the streets of Jerusalem ran with blood. All in the name of God.
Also remember that, during Old Testament times the creator God commanded the wholesale slaughter of thousands of men, women and children.
So, God-fearing Jews and Christians, who believe in a loving and caring God thought it fair and right to kill whole civilisations and enslave millions of people over hundreds of years? Because why? Should we condemn the religion because of their behaviour? If they misinterpreted their holy books then why do you condemn ‘Darwinism’ and atheism because some clearly sick individuals claim to follow those ‘beliefs’? I say they got it wrong just like you will say the Crusaders and the generations after generations of Christian slave owners got it wrong.
For just about two millennia Christians treated some other human beings like property or even worse. And while that seems perfectly in line with Old Testament teachings it does seem to contradict what Jesus preached. But do you condemn those killers? Do you question their world view as somehow responsible for what they did? No, you do not.
You have a gross and obvious double standard. Perhaps you should be a bit more consistent and honest in how you apply your ‘woke’ standards. Make no mistake: by 18th century standards you are ‘woke’. They would have laughed you out of the pub 300 years ago for what you claim to believe now: women get to vote! Crazy! Blacks are citizens! Insane! We can’t beat our own children to get them to learn? Society will collapse! Your beliefs will weaken and bring down what makes our civilisation great. It’s the strong who win, who make the rules. Who get to have the money. Why should the uneducated, the slaves, women, have anything to say about how things are done? They don’t understand, their brains are not capable of understanding. That what God intended. He made man first and primary. It’s obvious. To say anything different is just lunacy.
JVL, so your argument is not that Atheism is better than Christianity in creating a more just and humane society but rather that Christianity is ALMOST as bad as atheism is in its atrocities?
You do see the fatal flaw in your entire line a reasoning do you not?
Bornagain77: so your argument is not that Atheism is better than Christianity in creating a more just and humane society but rather that Christianity is ALMOST as bad as atheism is in its atrocities?
No, that was not my point. I would try and correct your interpretation of what I said except that a) it’s pretty obvious to anyone what I actually said and b) you will continue to bend any arguments or conversational points in a way that you can then respond to in a way that you like.
You don’t actually even try to converse fairly and honestly. I guess that is respected amongst your fans but I’m tired of dealing with it.
When you’re ready to actually address the actual points made let me know.
@ jvl
Lol That’s called lying with statistics
And by the way the millions and millions of lives lost or not validated because the fact that you decided to lie with statistics
That’s a swing and a miss
@ jvl
So there’s a couple ways I can go about this
And I read your comment and I can sum up all of your complaints as trying to colorfully paint me a hypocrite
You weave this beautiful Tapestry attempting to say that I don’t question my Bible but yeah I condemn Darwinism and all of its evils
But at the same time I just see somebody that not only has misinterpreted so much of my belief but is one of those people that believes crap like the myth of the Spanish Inquisition because it supports your blind hate for religion
Your whole commentary is that type of rubbish
There’s literally so much rubbish that I have to spend extra time to try to shift through it and that’s why I’m giving you this comment right now so when I get back to you I will simply dissect everything you said because I’ll have the time
Meanwhile I’m going to give you this site. I want you to present all of your grievances to the commentators there, they will happily answer every one of your little issues.
Not only will they answer them for you, but there are plenty of resources that directly answer 90% of what you complained about already on the site
So before you start swinging at me with the nonsense that you blathered out of your mouth why don’t you actually take some time to look at what the other side really does believe
Because as you were accusing me of not understanding your side of things I certainly can see yours is a collection of the same mantra spewed out of every Dawkinites mouth which misunderstands everything which fuels your self righteous nonsense
And you can take what you claim that I have a gross double standard and shove it where the sun don’t shine Hypocrite.
https://www.catholic.com/
All the answers to your bitching can be found on that site
JVL, you accuse me of not being fair and honest in comparing my Christianity with your Atheism.
I beg to differ.
As to the question of Religion vs. Atheism? Which Side Can Rightly Claim to be Reasonable and Tolerant? Let’s compare countries fairly and honestly shall we JVL?
So JVL, just ‘fairly and honestly’ looking over that list of countries, the comparison between Christianity and Atheism is not even close.
Do you still think I am being unfair in my assessment of your atheism? If so, please tell me exactly which of those atheistic countries you would like to live in ond let’s see if we can start a gofundme page here on UD in order for you to move to the atheistic utopia of your desire. 🙂
@21 correction “Are not invalidated”
@Seversky:
Probably a tiny number in comparison with the tens of millions of children slaughtered by christianists at the altar of abortion.
@ AndyClue what are you talking about? They aren’t babies, humans, or children being terminated with abortion. It’s a human right to their bodily autonomy which trumps the bodily autonomy of the thing in their womb. It’s not human just a clump of cells…….
Now I’ll drop the sarcasm
It’s about 42 million a year are murder for population control dressed up as a human right that requires you to redefine human life at the embryonic stage to justify murdering an unborn child.