Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 63 (9041 total)
77 online now:
anglagard, nwr, PaulK, ringo, xongsmith (5 members, 72 visitors)
Newest Member: maria
Post Volume: Total: 885,916 Year: 3,562/14,102 Month: 182/321 Week: 42/59 Day: 3/4 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Forum: Darwnist Ideology
Syamsu 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4522 days)
Posts: 1914
From: amsterdam
Joined: 05-19-2002


Message 1 of 265 (84947)
02-10-2004 6:19 AM


I request a forum be made on the subject of Darwinist ideology. In this forum things would be discussed like: the link of Darwinism to Social Darwinism / Eugenics, evolutionary psychology selfhelp books, peerreviewed papers on the effects Darwinism has on people's beliefs, etc.

Like I said before the issue of Darwinist ideology is central to the Creation vs Evolution controversy. There would be no big controversy if it weren't for the Social Darwinists, eugenicists, and now the evopsych selfhelp guru's.

http://www.iit.edu/departments/humanities/impact/colloquium/ongley_2001f.html

This link makes the case that Bryant, arguably the most renowned creationist ever in the evolution vs creation controversy, mainly argued against the immorality of Darwinism.

http://www.eugenics-watch.com/roots/chap08.html

This is the kind of teaching that Bryant argued against.

http://www.helsinki.fi/~pjojala/Gasman.htm

This is the kind of thing that Bryant foresaw Darwinist ideology would lead to.

regards,
Mohammad Nor Syamsu


Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by Dan Carroll, posted 02-10-2004 9:24 AM Syamsu has not yet responded
 Message 4 by Dr Jack, posted 02-10-2004 9:54 AM Syamsu has not yet responded
 Message 12 by truthlover, posted 02-10-2004 11:26 AM Syamsu has responded

  
Dan Carroll
Inactive Member


Message 2 of 265 (84972)
02-10-2004 9:24 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Syamsu
02-10-2004 6:19 AM


I request a forum be made on the subject of my impending nuptials with Eliza Dushku, since that subject is central to maintaining my delusions.


"It isn't faith that makes good science, it's curiosity."
-Professor Barnhard, The Day the Earth Stood Still

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Syamsu, posted 02-10-2004 6:19 AM Syamsu has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Mammuthus, posted 02-10-2004 9:45 AM Dan Carroll has not yet responded

  
Mammuthus
Member (Idle past 5407 days)
Posts: 3085
From: Munich, Germany
Joined: 08-09-2002


Message 3 of 265 (84977)
02-10-2004 9:45 AM
Reply to: Message 2 by Dan Carroll
02-10-2004 9:24 AM


I request that a forum be made on the subject of the breast of Janet Jackson's that we did not get to see. I know that the instigator of this thread does not like comparisons (it could lead to prejudicial terms like areola and nipple) but it would clearly be appopriate within the context of his desire to talk about comparative reproduction.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by Dan Carroll, posted 02-10-2004 9:24 AM Dan Carroll has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by MrHambre, posted 02-10-2004 9:59 AM Mammuthus has not yet responded

  
Dr Jack
Member (Idle past 1036 days)
Posts: 3507
From: Leicester, England
Joined: 07-14-2003


Message 4 of 265 (84979)
02-10-2004 9:54 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Syamsu
02-10-2004 6:19 AM


And what will you debate in this forum, Syamsu, and with whom? May as well have an auto-responder to every post which says something like:

"There is no 'darwinian ideology'. Science is not a basis for morality. We wouldn't give a stuff if evolution did cause immorality, it'd still be true."


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Syamsu, posted 02-10-2004 6:19 AM Syamsu has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by PaulK, posted 02-10-2004 10:06 AM Dr Jack has not yet responded

  
MrHambre
Member (Idle past 324 days)
Posts: 1495
From: Framingham, MA, USA
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 5 of 265 (84980)
02-10-2004 9:59 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by Mammuthus
02-10-2004 9:45 AM


Mammuthus,

Now it all becomes clear to me. When you talked about the boob at the half-time show, I just assumed you meant Kid Rock. I think the forum on the Janet matter is a good idea, but if I have to endure another of Justin's long-winded excuses about nylon-eating bacteria I think I'll just scream.

regards,
Esteban "Black and Stacked" Hambre


This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Mammuthus, posted 02-10-2004 9:45 AM Mammuthus has not yet responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 16873
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 6 of 265 (84981)
02-10-2004 10:06 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by Dr Jack
02-10-2004 9:54 AM


I think we should have a "Bigotry and Smear Campaigns" forum.

We can put Syamasu's attacks on "Darwinist Ideology" there along with Buzsaw's attacks on "Islam". Maybe Tamara ranting about "bogus species" and "gill slits" could go there as well.

And the rest of us could ignore it because the title of the forum lets everyone know what to expect.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Dr Jack, posted 02-10-2004 9:54 AM Dr Jack has not yet responded

  
Syamsu 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4522 days)
Posts: 1914
From: amsterdam
Joined: 05-19-2002


Message 7 of 265 (84988)
02-10-2004 10:32 AM


deleted triplepost

[This message has been edited by Syamsu, 02-10-2004]


  
Syamsu 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4522 days)
Posts: 1914
From: amsterdam
Joined: 05-19-2002


Message 8 of 265 (84989)
02-10-2004 10:32 AM


Why don't you all go to talk origins?
Go there, and enjoy the substandard vitriol you all seem so fond of.

For other people I encourage you to read the links provided, which substantiates that Darwinist ideology is, and is supposed to be, what the evolution vs creationism controversy is about.

There is no serious intelellectual who ignores the issue of Darwinist ideology, because the importance of the holocaust weighs quite heavy still with most intellectuals, and you can't ignore the input of Darwinist professionals and enthusiasts in ideology and effort in that horror. From the indoctrination of youth in Hitlerschools, to the T4 project to kill the disabled, and then to the construction of the concentrationcamps, the evidence is quite straighforward and broad.

regards,
Mohammad Nor Syamsu


Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by Dan Carroll, posted 02-10-2004 10:40 AM Syamsu has responded

  
Dan Carroll
Inactive Member


Message 9 of 265 (84993)
02-10-2004 10:40 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by Syamsu
02-10-2004 10:32 AM


Re: Why don't you all go to talk origins?
Despite the fact that the Nazi party taught children math, math continues to be taught in our schools to this day. Do we want to bring up our children as Nazis, with no moral compass?

Do you have any idea how much math was used in the concentration camps? Every time new prisoners were brought in, and every time they slaughtered people in the ovens, they had to add, subtract, or in some cases even multiply numbers. Obviously the ideology of math was responsible for the holocaust.


"It isn't faith that makes good science, it's curiosity."
-Professor Barnhard, The Day the Earth Stood Still

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Syamsu, posted 02-10-2004 10:32 AM Syamsu has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by Syamsu, posted 02-10-2004 10:58 AM Dan Carroll has responded
 Message 215 by FreeThinker, posted 03-05-2004 9:17 AM Dan Carroll has responded

  
Syamsu 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4522 days)
Posts: 1914
From: amsterdam
Joined: 05-19-2002


Message 10 of 265 (85001)
02-10-2004 10:58 AM
Reply to: Message 9 by Dan Carroll
02-10-2004 10:40 AM


Re: Why don't you all go to talk origins?
The Nazi party did not teach math, which was taught in regular schools, but they did teach Darwinism in the Hitlerschools. Go and read the links I provided, and then give a meaningful opinion in stead of the usual prattle.

Aside from that you have to judge on the real thing. What was taught to Americans was a racist eugenic ideolgized version of Darwinism. I suppose that the same people who put this kind of thing in the textbook, put the laws against immigration of Jews to America in the lawbook, and fashioned America's eugenic laws. This was then oppurtunely used by Hitler as validation of his own policies.

Even if it were so that Darwinism has been completely cleaned up since then, which is not the case, it is too late. Forever the creation vs evolution controversy will be dominated by that history, which is why we can't be without a forum on Darwinist ideology.

regards,
Mohammad Nor Syamsu


This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Dan Carroll, posted 02-10-2004 10:40 AM Dan Carroll has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by Dan Carroll, posted 02-10-2004 11:14 AM Syamsu has not yet responded

  
Dan Carroll
Inactive Member


Message 11 of 265 (85009)
02-10-2004 11:14 AM
Reply to: Message 10 by Syamsu
02-10-2004 10:58 AM


Re: Why don't you all go to talk origins?
quote:
The Nazi party did not teach math, which was taught in regular schools

I'm sorry, I was under the impression that the Nazi party was the party in government in Germany during World War II, and therefore responsible for the schools.

My bad, I guess.

But I see you do not deny that math was used in the concentration camps. You could even go so far as to say that the concentration camps could not have existed without math!

So, once again, the ideology of math must be responsible for the holocaust. Don't go pawning it off on darwinist ideology when mathematical ideology is so clearly to blame. How can one even discuss math without bringing up how it was applied in the holocaust?

quote:
I suppose

Ut.

You sure do. Quite a bit, in fact.

quote:
Forever the creation vs evolution controversy will be dominated by that history, which is why we can't be without a forum on Darwinist ideology.

For you, perhaps. For me, the whole thing is quite dominated by the beauty of Ms. Eliza Dushku. On one hand, she's got some pretty obvious reproductive advantages, which would tend to support natural selection. On the other hand, I look at her and am almost tempted to think there just might be a God after all.

Of course, this whole Eliza thing is just my personal obsession. So there's certainly no reason to, say, start devoting a whole forum to discussion of Eliza Dushku's excessive beauty. That would just be nuts.

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to idly muse awhile on the subject of being "dominated" by Eliza Dushku.

And people say I don't understand the importance of Faith...

[This message has been edited by Dan Carroll, 02-10-2004]


"It isn't faith that makes good science, it's curiosity."
-Professor Barnhard, The Day the Earth Stood Still

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Syamsu, posted 02-10-2004 10:58 AM Syamsu has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by MrHambre, posted 02-10-2004 1:35 PM Dan Carroll has responded

  
truthlover
Member (Idle past 2991 days)
Posts: 1548
From: Selmer, TN
Joined: 02-12-2003


Message 12 of 265 (85015)
02-10-2004 11:26 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Syamsu
02-10-2004 6:19 AM


Like I said before the issue of Darwinist ideology is central to the Creation vs Evolution controversy.

How odd! Yet you can't seem to find one person on this evolution and creationist board who agrees.

There would be no big controversy if it weren't for the Social Darwinists, eugenicists, and now the evopsych selfhelp guru's.

Bwahahahaha!!!

I suppose when Darwin ran into all that controversy, it was because of all the social Darwinists around at the time who knew his theory was coming and had already prepared their social reforms around it?

Let's try this. There would be no big controversy (over evolution and creation) if it weren't for Biblical literalists who need a 6,000 year old earth to maintain their religion.

Is that really so hard to see?

I was a fundy, and I hung out with YECers. There were many among us who created a morality based on evolution and atheism and charged others with holding that morality, but all of us knew the only thing we cared about was defending our Bible.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Syamsu, posted 02-10-2004 6:19 AM Syamsu has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by Brad McFall, posted 02-10-2004 3:24 PM truthlover has not yet responded
 Message 16 by Minnemooseus, posted 02-10-2004 4:30 PM truthlover has not yet responded
 Message 18 by Syamsu, posted 02-11-2004 5:36 AM truthlover has responded

  
MrHambre
Member (Idle past 324 days)
Posts: 1495
From: Framingham, MA, USA
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 13 of 265 (85045)
02-10-2004 1:35 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by Dan Carroll
02-10-2004 11:14 AM


Tru Boredom
Dan,

When your honey's show gets canned, are you going to plunge into an abysmal depression like when Ebert gave Beyond Borders a bad review?

regards,
Esteban "Bring it On" Hambre


This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by Dan Carroll, posted 02-10-2004 11:14 AM Dan Carroll has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by Dan Carroll, posted 02-10-2004 1:40 PM MrHambre has not yet responded

  
Dan Carroll
Inactive Member


Message 14 of 265 (85046)
02-10-2004 1:40 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by MrHambre
02-10-2004 1:35 PM


Re: Tru Boredom
Uch, can you believe she turned down doing a Buffy spin-off to do that pile of crap?

Regardless, I'll be right by her side to comfort her. Five hundred feet by her side, at least. Damn restraining order...


This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by MrHambre, posted 02-10-2004 1:35 PM MrHambre has not yet responded

  
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 3964 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 15 of 265 (85078)
02-10-2004 3:24 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by truthlover
02-10-2004 11:26 AM


I would like to see some study in Darwiniana of the how the changes in the study of CHEMISTRY affected his(darwin's) thought. When I began reading The power of motion in plants and read the MIT sponsored intro which tried sans plants haveing an "endocrine" equivalent of moving things on the beyond phenomenology of auxin I fully expected some chemical info. It was about taxonomy of motion of motion in plants. Darwin, Asa Grey and other were interested in perversions in tendrils and Hukley passed from the pea to the tendril this fast but there was recently scholarship that indicated that these 1800s scholars were not recognizing Ampere's use of it in magnetism. It all sounds too suspcious for my scientifically santized mind and I wonder how much Darwin did not get the idea of "individual varation" straight out of Faraday's need to be wrong ONLY IF ANY CHEMCIAL VARATION exist. This is clearly not the evopsych but what is it? BWhahah it was not either.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by truthlover, posted 02-10-2004 11:26 AM truthlover has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2021