Several posters over the years have implied that Evolution and Racism are related or that racism is supported by evolution.
The fact is that the Theory of Evolution is antithetical to the concept of racism. As we learn more, particularly in the field of genetics, it becomes increasingly obvious that there is almost no difference between humans of any kind, and in fact far less difference between humans and apes, or even humans and pond scum, than anyone imagined.
Humans and pond scum are directly related, we both are descended from a common ancestor.
Racism is one of the leftovers from an earlier period when mankind was far more ignorant than today, and in particular from the assumption that religious claims of exclusivity and dominance have any validity.
In other words, why does the phylogenetic difference between a human and a cat allow you to act differently to humans than you do to cats, but if you act even slightly different because of a much smaller (but still real) difference between humans and other humans it become unacceptable?
That's why that is such a silly argument on your part. There is absolutely nothing in the Theory of Evolution that could be used to justify such behavior.
Anyone who thinks they can use the Theory of Evolution to justify racism is simply showing their total ignorance.
While evolution may not justify racism (and I never said it did), creationism certainly works better than evolution to hold it back - they can appeal to 'humans, with a soul, as opposed to soulless animals and plants' or 'the kind created in God's image' as definitions of what shouldn't be discriminated against. Modern biological science tells us there is no clear-cut boundary between humans, and there is also no clear-cut boundary between all animals, or all lifeforms.
What you are saying should be laughed at.
You admit that modern biology says that all living things are related. Period.
Biblical Creationism does make distinctions between critters.
You cannot find any support for racism in Evolution or the Theory of Evolution.
Re: A schitzophrenic theory: the evolution of a lie
Therefore, I am of the opinion that the assertions you've heard over the years aren't fabrications, nor is racism the antithesis of evolution. The theory has proven to be so flexible that a view defended in the beginning can now be vehemently denied.
You never can get anything right.
The topic, in case you missed it is "Evolution is antithetical to racism" not as you misstated it, "racism the antithesis of evolution".
The point is, "What is there in Evolution or the Theory of Evolution that can be used to support racism?"
For your support you pull on some quote mined comments from people living over 100 years ago.
So in addition to misrepresenting the topic, you are simply quotemining ancient history.
I could respond by posting quotes from recent Biblical Christians that show support of racism, but it is irrelevant to the discussion.
The facts are that regardless of what anyone thought 100 years ago, Evolution and the Theory of Evolution have shown us definitively that there is no major differences between any of the various races of mankind and in fact that all living critters are of one "Kind". We are all the "Living Kind" as opposed to "Not Living Kind" or the "Can't say for sure if it is Living or Not Kind".
Re: A schitzophrenic theory: the evolution of a lie
Deal with the issue. There is a legitimate basis for questioning the bait and switch of evolutionary theory, as science is now pandering to political correctness, rather than simply following the evidence wherever it may lead.
What bait and switch of evolutionary theory? Are you referring to the fact that we know more now and have absolute evidence today that was not available 100 years ago?
You quote from "-National Research Council: A Study of American Intelligence - Princeton University Press; 1923"
That was actually a book written by Carl Brigham, a psychologist at Princeton and one where he also later denounced his views and specifically disowned the book. Quotes such as the one you use are regularly posted out of context and without telling the whole story. A few seconds research would have given you the context, and your source certainly should have know the full context unless, as is the norm with Biblical Creationists sites, they are being willfully ignorant or dishonest.
It is also totally irrelevant. The FACT is that what we have learned from our study of evolution is that all living things are related.
So far you have presented nothing related to that.
Or maybe not. The line between Lamarck and Darwin really wasn't clear, if it existed at all. In those days I think the two were generally regarded as complimentary.
You might think so, but even if true (which it is not since what was proposed by Darwin has since been borne out by every new discovery while the theories of Lamark have been shown to be false and were not accepted even while he was alive) it is irrelevant. Today we know far more than at the time of either of those gentlemen and fortunately what we have learned from Evolution is that all mankind is really one species and that we are also very close kin to the chimps, gorillas, orangutans and bonobos and pretty closely related to the grass and snails.
Can we just say that dogmatic devotion to an evolutionary paradigm motivated the Soviet-style Communists to suppress science?
No, we can't, because that is not what happened.
Further, you still have not show how Evolution or the Theory of Evolution could support racism.
Nor have you shown how Marxism supports racism. One of the tenets of Marx work was the equality of the individual. There was no differentiation based on race, but only on productivity.
And one 'race' could never be deemed "less productive" than another? Once 'races' are defined, it seems that one will inevitably be considered 'more fit' than another.
You even quoted what I said and still misrepresented it. Amazing.
The key to the Communist Manifesto is the individual. And yes, one race could not be deemed "less productive" than another. The whole basis of Marxism is equality.
When reading liars like Marx, one must expect some flowery language to be included. Such persons will frequently say one thing that conflicts with another, leaving their followers to implement the real plan where the rubber meets the road.
Yet you have not shown Marx was a liar.
You are also simply avoiding the topic. Can you show how the Theory of Evolution is not antithetical to racism?
Still waiting for CTD to support ANYTHING, but as pointed out in Message 102, since Marx published the Communist Manifesto over a decade before Darwin published Origins, I think he will have a hard time here too.Aslan is not a Tame Lion