Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,816 Year: 3,073/9,624 Month: 918/1,588 Week: 101/223 Day: 12/17 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Racial Evolution 101
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 4 of 109 (96099)
03-30-2004 7:37 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by MarkAustin
03-30-2004 2:16 PM


- he was an opponent of both slavery and vivisection, and opposed rhe social darwinism that others read into his theories for example - would by today's standard be considered a reactionary
It is my understanding that he believed that pigmy blacks and for that matter all blacks were/are soul-less inferior humans not as fully evolved as whites and that Hitler was highly influenced by Darwin's racism. Someone correct me if I'm mistaken.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by MarkAustin, posted 03-30-2004 2:16 PM MarkAustin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by crashfrog, posted 03-30-2004 7:41 PM Buzsaw has replied
 Message 13 by MarkAustin, posted 03-31-2004 3:57 AM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 14 by Garf, posted 04-04-2004 12:17 AM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 6 of 109 (96148)
03-30-2004 8:55 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by crashfrog
03-30-2004 7:41 PM


Alternatively, you might substantiate your own claims with Darwin's writings, or other evidence. You know, just a thought.
After reading my substantiation, CF, you might wish you'd have done the digging. You might have gotten by with a shallower dig.
.......few people likely are aware of the full title of Darwin’s most famous work: The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection”or The Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. The Oxford English Dictionary denotes that, historically speaking, the term “race” referred to a group of persons, animals, or plants connected by common descent or origin”in other words, similar to the way it is used today.
While many have argued that Darwin himself was not a “racist” (referring specifically to the fact that The Origin of Species did not include much discussion about Homo sapiens), his second book left little question about his personal views. Titled The Descent of Man, one entire chapter was dedicated to “The Races of Man.” In that book, Darwin wrote:
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...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 the baboon, instead of as now between the Negro or Australian and the gorilla (1874, p. 178).
While some have argued that Darwin was simply “predicting the future,” the chapter on human races makes painfully clear his beliefs on the subject.
Science and Religion - Evolution is of necessity racist
IN THE NEWS” WAS DARWIN A RACIST? Brad Harrub, Ph.D. http://www.killdevilhill.com
I can see where Hitler would have taken this football and ran with it. The Lousiana Legislature has introduced a bill denouncing Darwin on the basis that he was as bad as Hitler in his thinking and was Hitler's inspiration.
Note the ORIGINAL full title to THE ORIGIN OF SPECIES.

The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by crashfrog, posted 03-30-2004 7:41 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by crashfrog, posted 03-30-2004 9:00 PM Buzsaw has replied
 Message 8 by Riley, posted 03-30-2004 9:14 PM Buzsaw has replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 9 of 109 (96161)
03-30-2004 9:15 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by crashfrog
03-30-2004 9:00 PM


So, you supported your assertions. What would have been so hard about doing that in the first place?
I was relying on memory from one of Ken Hovind's TV lectures. Most folks post things they have learned without supportive evidence here in town up front. Why should I be expected to operate otherwise?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by crashfrog, posted 03-30-2004 9:00 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 10 of 109 (96164)
03-30-2004 9:21 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by Riley
03-30-2004 9:14 PM


So the State of Louisiana, which sanctioning the trafficking in human beings for the first 55 years of Charles Darwin's life is now going to protect us from his racist legacy?
Beneath contempt.
These are different people. Why should the atrocities of others be laid to their charge?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Riley, posted 03-30-2004 9:14 PM Riley has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by crashfrog, posted 03-30-2004 9:49 PM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 12 by Riley, posted 03-31-2004 12:08 AM Buzsaw 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