Darwin, Hitler, and the Culture of Death

Darwin, Hitler, and the Culture of Death (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> Current Events

Message

SILVERNAME -> Darwin, Hitler, and the Culture of Death (5/11/2008 6:36:36 AM)
Commentary by Michael Baggot May 5, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Ben Stein has suffered extensive media criticism for drawing the connection between Darwin, Hitler, and the modern eugenics movements in a powerful 10-minute section of his film "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed". In an MSNBC.com review, Arthur Caplan calls the connection Stein draws between Darwin's theory and the Holocaust "despicable". Neo-Darwinians on the whole have unleashed a barrage of insults at Stein and his work. They have also, however, completely failed to address the intimidating body of evidence Stein presents to support his claims. While Stein has explicitly asserted that not every neo-Darwinist is a eugenicist, an examination of the historic record reveals that neo-Darwinism can and has provided the philosophic justification for numerous horrific eugenic projects. http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/may/08050602.html

SonInMe1 -> RE: Darwin, Hitler, and the Culture of Death (5/11/2008 9:36:52 AM)
Survival of the fittest only can be perverted be defining the fittest as your own group. Fit is fit

1dblthnk02 -> RE: Darwin, Hitler, and the Culture of Death (5/11/2008 10:11:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SILVERNAME Ben Stein has suffered extensive media criticism for drawing the connection between Darwin, Hitler, and the modern eugenics movements in a powerful 10-minute section of his film "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed". Ben Stein has "suffered?" He deserves every last lick of criticism that he receives. Were he actually a man of science, he would understand that Darwin's foundation led to genetic research, which in turn led to the inescapable conclusion that there is absolutely no basis for scientific racism. quote: Neo-Darwinians on the whole have unleashed a barrage of insults at Stein and his work. They have also, however, completely failed to address the intimidating body of evidence Stein presents to support his claims. . . . And yet these same kind of people will insult Al Gore, discredit him without addressing the body of evidence supporting his claims, and that's alright?! Hypocrisy, pure plain & simple . . . quote: While Stein has explicitly asserted that not every neo-Darwinist is a eugenicist . . . Depending on how loosely you define eugenics. Improving the condition of mankind via medical breakthroughs in genetic research can arguably "improve" the human species. But Hitler-esque concepts of breeding a master race is contrary to science. Unless we mechanically engineer our DNA, there is no genetic path to breeding superior people, whatever "superior" might mean. quote: an examination of the historic record reveals that neo-Darwinism can and has provided the philosophic justification for numerous horrific eugenic projects. Such as . . . ?

Marcus. -> RE: Darwin, Hitler, and the Culture of Death (5/11/2008 12:12:09 PM)
First, it wasn't an inescapable conclusion. Look at the social Darwinism/eugenics movement's history. Many thought that applying Darwinism to remove the unfit, as they saw, was inescapable for the improvement and survival of humanity to them. Margaret Sanger was a very strong supporter of eugenics. The abortion industry was designed to remove the undesirables. Second, Al Gore is a con man with his carbon credits idea. All it will do is make the worst polluters feel good that they are doing something when in fact they aren't. Many of his statements have been debunked. Remember the British court ruling last year. His ideas were labeled as exaggerated. Al is a sensationalist. You may as well claim that P. T. Barnum was a visionary. Al bears out Barnum's old saying. There is a sucker born every minute. Third, again many people believed that those Hitler-esque experiments were necessary. Just because Darwinists today are appalled at what has happened under the name of their messiah doesn't change the facts.

1dblthnk02 -> RE: Darwin, Hitler, and the Culture of Death (5/11/2008 6:47:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Marcus. First, it wasn't an inescapable conclusion. Yes, it was and still is. Human genomes contain far less variance among the whole population than among other primates. The variance is so small as to render it nearly inconsequential. Were it not for scientific study conducted under the assumption of the correctness of human evolution, we would not know this for sure. quote: Al is a sensationalist. You may as well claim that P. T. Barnum was a visionary. Al bears out Barnum's old saying. There is a sucker born every minute. . . . ditto Ben Stein, the Hollywood counterpart. quote: Third, again many people believed that those Hitler-esque experiments were necessary. Some of "them" were Christians: does this fact also indict Christianity? quote: Just because Darwinists today are appalled at what has happened under the name of their messiah doesn't change the facts. Whether or not they are personally appalled doesn't change the facts. The facts are the facts-- period. The idea of master races and sub-races runs contrary to genetic reality.

McFatty -> RE: Darwin, Hitler, and the Culture of Death (5/11/2008 7:00:29 PM)
Facts are facts. The basis for Darwinism is anything but

Jhud -> RE: Darwin, Hitler, and the Culture of Death (5/11/2008 10:29:52 PM)
quote: Ben Stein has "suffered?" He deserves every last lick of criticism that he receives. Were he actually a man of science, he would understand that Darwin's foundation led to genetic research, which in turn led to the inescapable conclusion that there is absolutely no basis for scientific racism. Eugenics and racism aren't the same thing, and perhaps the most pernicious aspect of eugenics, culling of those who are considered less desirable, continues until this day - as result, ironically, of genetic testing.

1dblthnk02 -> RE: Darwin, Hitler, and the Culture of Death (5/12/2008 8:23:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Jhud Eugenics and racism aren't the same thing Eugenics went hand-in-hand with so-called scientific racism. quote: and perhaps the most pernicious aspect of eugenics, culling of those who are considered less desirable, continues until this day - as result, ironically, of genetic testing. What is this "culling" that you refered to?

Jhud -> RE: Darwin, Hitler, and the Culture of Death (5/12/2008 10:58:56 AM)
quote: Eugenics went hand-in-hand with so-called scientific racism. They were certainly contemporaneous, but not equal. quote: What is this "culling" that you refered to? The systematic elimination of Down's children, for one.

1dblthnk02 -> RE: Darwin, Hitler, and the Culture of Death (5/12/2008 11:05:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Jhud They were certainly contemporaneous, but not equal. So what? One propped up the other until genetics research knocked them both down. quote: The systematic elimination of Down's children, for one. Where is this done?

CatholicCritter -> RE: Darwin, Hitler, and the Culture of Death (5/12/2008 11:44:04 AM)
Darnwin's theory of evolution is not intrinsically evil. Without speaking to its accuracy, the sick and twisted manipulation of said theory by the Margaret Sangers and Adolf Hitlers of the world are evil. Just like nanotechnology or any other scientific progress is not evil by its own nature, neither is eugenics. When humans unethically manipulate progress with evil or ignorant intent, then it crosses the line. This book is very good: http://www.amazon.com/Architects-Culture-Death-Donald-Marco/dp/1586170163

Jhud -> RE: Darwin, Hitler, and the Culture of Death (5/12/2008 11:52:34 AM)
quote: So what? One propped up the other until genetics research knocked them both down. Actually, WWII brought an end to much overt eugenics because of the disastrous consequences of such programs. quote: Where is this done? Primarily it's done through testing for Down's and then the abortion of babies which test positive.

CCCdnt -> RE: Darwin, Hitler, and the Culture of Death (5/12/2008 2:30:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Jhud quote: Where is this done? Primarily it's done through testing for Down's and then the abortion of babies which test positive. This is true. We knew from research that we would be offered this test by my wife's doctor while she was pregnant. When that time came, we said that we did not want the test since the results would not matter...we would not get an abortion.

CCCdnt -> RE: Darwin, Hitler, and the Culture of Death (5/12/2008 2:34:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: 1dblthnk02 quote: ORIGINAL: Marcus. First, it wasn't an inescapable conclusion. Yes, it was and still is. Human genomes contain far less variance among the whole population than among other primates. The variance is so small as to render it nearly inconsequential. Were it not for scientific study conducted under the assumption of the correctness of human evolution, we would not know this for sure. Actually since the Bible teaches that all are descended from the same two people...Adam and Eve, the Bible taught long before "the scientific study of human evolution" that there is only one "race"...the human race.

Jhud -> RE: Darwin, Hitler, and the Culture of Death (5/12/2008 2:36:29 PM)
quote: This is true. We knew from research that we would be offered this test by my wife's doctor while she was pregnant. When that time came, we said that we did not want the test since the results would not matter...we would not get an abortion. Yes, we had a test with our first son (because it was just part of the standard exam) that indicated that he was likely to be mentally retarded. It was a rather stressful two weeks before they had the results of a second test which showed he was fine. We wouldn't have gotten an abortion in either case, but we decided after that no more tests of that sort, despite the fact that doctors strongly encouraged them every time we were pregnant. It is hard to know what we would have missed if my bright, strapping son hadn't been part of our lives.

StephK -> RE: Darwin, Hitler, and the Culture of Death (5/12/2008 2:42:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Jhud quote: This is true. We knew from research that we would be offered this test by my wife's doctor while she was pregnant. When that time came, we said that we did not want the test since the results would not matter...we would not get an abortion. Yes, we had a test with our first son (because it was just part of the standard exam) that indicated that he was likely to be mentally retarded. It was a rather stressful two weeks before they had the results of a second test which showed he was fine. We wouldn't have gotten an abortion in either case, but we decided after that no more tests of that sort, despite the fact that doctors strongly encouraged them every time we were pregnant. It is hard to know what we would have missed if my bright, strapping son hadn't been part of our lives. My sister was over 35 when she got pregnant the last time and they did the test and said the baby had Down's. Her doctor kept insisting that she abort. Since my sister is a microbiologist she told her no and demanded to be given the more precise test. Needless to say my niece is very bright and I might add takes after her mother in her love of math and science.

Jhud -> RE: Darwin, Hitler, and the Culture of Death (5/12/2008 2:46:41 PM)
quote: My sister was over 35 when she got pregnant the last time and they did the test and said the baby had Down's. Her doctor kept insisting that she abort. Since my sister is a microbiologist she told her no and demanded to be given the more precise test. Needless to say my niece is very bright and I might add takes after her mother in her love of math and science. One just wonders how often such tests are wrong?

StephK -> RE: Darwin, Hitler, and the Culture of Death (5/12/2008 2:58:16 PM)
The first test is basically a screening test and they are often wrong. What bothered my sister was the insistence of the doctor to just schedule an abortion on the spot without doing the amniocentesis. There are false positives all the time with tests.

1dblthnk02 -> RE: Darwin, Hitler, and the Culture of Death (5/12/2008 3:20:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Jhud Actually, WWII brought an end to much overt eugenics because of the disastrous consequences of such programs. This is also about the same time that genetics delved into DNA. In any event, evolutionary science has continued to render that kind of eugenics untenable. quote: Primarily it's done through testing for Down's and then the abortion of babies which test positive. This has nothing to do with racism or superior breeds, but rather with eliminating those with birth defects. Again, I don't see how the theory of evolution plays into this, but I'll grant that it is an example of eugenics. On the positive side, eugenic testing (e.g. amniocentesis) can also identify children born with defects other than Downs (e.g. 22nd chromosome disorders) thereby allowing the parents to prepare for potential risks (e.g. Hypoplastic Left Heart Syndrome) in case they do go through with the birth.

1dblthnk02 -> RE: Darwin, Hitler, and the Culture of Death (5/12/2008 3:25:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CCCdnt Actually since the Bible teaches that all are descended from the same two people...Adam and Eve, the Bible taught long before "the scientific study of human evolution" that there is only one "race"...the human race. . . . But offers us nothing of scientific value to test, evaluate, or base falsifiable predictions on.

henny -> RE: Darwin, Hitler, and the Culture of Death (5/12/2008 3:29:38 PM)
Regardless of how Darwin's thought may have been misused in realms where it is no longer applicable and misapplied by social theorists, this really says nothing about the validity of evolution. If you want to question evolution on its own terms, I.E. as science, that's fine, but when someone links it to Hitler it usually suggests that they are more interested in demonizing it by any means necessary than they are in seriously critiquing it as a scientific theory. I think Stein's film would have probably been taken a lot more seriously if he had stuck to just critiquing evolution on it's own terms and left the demonization to the creationists who really have no interest in the science of evolution one way or another. But another problem with attempting to demonize evolution based upon how people have attempted to apply it socially, though, is that there really never has been a consensus of what exactly evolution means when applied to the social sphere. Back in the late 19th and early 20th centuries when applying Darwinism to the social sphere was all the rage, it was used by different people at different points to justify claims that were completely oppossed to each other. It's never really had a consistent meaning when it comes to social application, but rather it was used by pretty much every political view point at differing times -which seems to suggest that social application of Darwin really says more about the individual applying it than it does about the actual scientific theory itself (If anyone's interested in this you should read, "Social Darwinism in American Thought" by Richard Hofstadter -it's a really interesting and unbiased look at the history of social darwinism in America).

cow451 -> RE: Darwin, Hitler, and the Culture of Death (5/12/2008 3:34:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SILVERNAME Commentary by Michael Baggot May 5, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Ben Stein has suffered extensive media criticism for drawing the connection between Darwin, Hitler, and the modern eugenics movements in a powerful 10-minute section of his film "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed". Yeah, he's really suffering. His next TV show will be Count Ben Stein's Money. Blaming Charles Darwin for the Holocaust is like blaming John the Baptist for the Inquisition.

1dblthnk02 -> RE: Darwin, Hitler, and the Culture of Death (5/12/2008 3:35:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: henny If you want to question evolution on its own terms, I.E. as science, that's fine, but when someone links it to Hitler it usually suggests that they are more interested in demonizing it by any means necessary than they are in seriously critiquing it as a scientific theory. . . . Which is yet another form of ad hominem argument via bad association. Of course, if I tell the truth by pointing this out, then I am accused of committing ad hominem for telling it like it is.

cow451 -> RE: Darwin, Hitler, and the Culture of Death (5/12/2008 3:48:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: 1dblthnk02 quote: ORIGINAL: henny If you want to question evolution on its own terms, I.E. as science, that's fine, but when someone links it to Hitler it usually suggests that they are more interested in demonizing it by any means necessary than they are in seriously critiquing it as a scientific theory. . . . Which is yet another form of ad hominem argument via bad association. Of course, if I tell the truth by pointing this out, then I am accused of committing ad hominem for telling it like it is. No, you are accused of being an evil, backsliding, evolution-loving, liberal, thinks-he-knows-it-all Darwinist.[;)]

1dblthnk02 -> RE: Darwin, Hitler, and the Culture of Death (5/12/2008 3:55:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cow451 No, you are accused of being an evil, backsliding, evolution-loving, liberal, thinks-he-knows-it-all Darwinist.[;)] Hmm . . . well, 5 out of 6 ain't bad.

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI