Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,913 Year: 4,170/9,624 Month: 1,041/974 Week: 368/286 Day: 11/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Is eugenics the logical result of Darwinism?
Hrun
Inactive Member


Message 179 of 231 (213976)
06-03-2005 5:20 PM
Reply to: Message 178 by Faith
06-03-2005 5:15 PM


Re: Off Topic?
Faith writes:
[...]and yes it's logically consistent with Darwinism, as has already been discussed. IMO IMO IMO IMO IMO!!
But the original question was not if it (Eugenics) is logically consistent with Darwinism but whether it is the logical result. The two are quite separate.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 178 by Faith, posted 06-03-2005 5:15 PM Faith has not replied

  
Hrun
Inactive Member


Message 182 of 231 (213998)
06-03-2005 6:55 PM
Reply to: Message 181 by Faith
06-03-2005 6:42 PM


Re: Off Topic?
Faith writes:
The best anyone can say for the ToE is that it is neutral.
I think you got it here, Faith. The ToE is completely neutral on this topic... and I don't think anybody can really claim it to be otherwise. The ToE is not a philosophy or a religion. It does not make rules about how we are to treat fellow human beings. It describes the process of how living things are related and change over time. That's it.
Just like Chemisitry or Nuclear Physics is completely neutral on the good and evil of warfare, the ToE is neutral on Eugenics.
Faith writes:
But I believe in fact it isn't, because just as humanitarian compassion is the direct fruit of the Bible's view of humanity, the ToE's view of humanity -- that we are descended from chemicals and previous forms of life -- offers no reason to put us above animals or count us as anything special at all, and the logical conclusions from that view of humanity IN ITSELF are what this thread is about.
Also here you are correct. ToE gives us no reason to put us above animals or makes us special. But neither do hundreds of other theories in Biology, Physics or Chemistry. They don't claim that they do. They don't need to. Who said that the ToE would, should or could tell us anything about 'humanity'?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 181 by Faith, posted 06-03-2005 6:42 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 183 by Faith, posted 06-03-2005 7:20 PM Hrun has replied

  
Hrun
Inactive Member


Message 184 of 231 (214008)
06-03-2005 7:24 PM
Reply to: Message 183 by Faith
06-03-2005 7:20 PM


Re: Off Topic?
If that is the case, my apologies. I entered this thread late and do not care to wade through 150 other messages. Since I can not impose on you to answer these questions again, please disregard my post and we consider this exchange closed.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 183 by Faith, posted 06-03-2005 7:20 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 185 by Faith, posted 06-03-2005 8:46 PM Hrun has not replied

  
Hrun
Inactive Member


Message 188 of 231 (214228)
06-04-2005 3:43 PM
Reply to: Message 186 by Trixie
06-04-2005 3:26 PM


Re: Exactly, Faith!!! You got it in one!
Trixie, unfortunately, you have to follow the rest of the quote where Faith says:
quote:
... But I believe in fact it isn't, [...]
Edit: Oops, I just saw your post 187, Faith. I just wanted to make sure that your views are properly characterized.
This message has been edited by Hrun, 06-04-2005 03:44 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 186 by Trixie, posted 06-04-2005 3:26 PM Trixie has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 192 by Trixie, posted 06-04-2005 4:19 PM Hrun has not replied

  
Hrun
Inactive Member


Message 190 of 231 (214233)
06-04-2005 4:01 PM
Reply to: Message 187 by Faith
06-04-2005 3:42 PM


Re: Exactly, Faith!!! You got it in one!
Faith writes:
Well, it's nice to be in agreement for a change, but I'm afraid I don't think the ToE is neutral. That's just the main argument that has been made here against my view. I think it generates exactly the genetic engineering ideas and ethics the first few generations thought it did, which is simply covered over by subsequent emphases on a compassionate ethic. This ethic and the ToE are in perpetual tension because they are inherently mutually contradictory. That's been my view all along. Ideas about human origins and nature can't possibly be neutral.
Faith, I know you said that you answered a number of questions I raised previously, so I won't repeat them here, even though they may be applicable. But I just can let this statement stand unchallenged:
quote:
Ideas about human origins and nature can't possibly be neutral.
Do you have any way to support this statement?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 187 by Faith, posted 06-04-2005 3:42 PM Faith has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024