Bob wrote:
On 14 Oct 2005 david ford wrote:
Bob wrote:
rather odd in that natural selection is never mentioned in 'mein
kampf'...
Do you grant that themes and phraseology along the lines of 'Nature is
red in tooth and claw' _are_ "mentioned in 'mein kampf'"?
non sequitur. again, neither darwin, nor natural selection are
mentioned in 'mein kampf'. do you grant this fact?
I have not yet come across in my reading of _MK_ the phrase "natural
selection," nor the word "Darwin."
Do you grant that _MK_ adopts the view that 'the stronger' will triumph
over 'the weaker' in a 'struggle'?
Hitler, Adolf. 1925, 1927, 1943, 1971. _Mein Kampf_, translation by
Ralph Manheim of the 1st edition of _Mein Kampf_ (Boston and NY:
Houghton Mifflin Company, A Mariner Book), 694pp. On 285 in the
chapter "Nation and Race," a paragraph and the bulk of a second
paragraph:
Any crossing of two beings not at exactly the same level
produces a medium between the level of the two parents. This
means: the offspring will probably stand higher than the
racially lower parent, but not as high as the higher one.
Consequently, it will later succumb in the struggle against the
higher level. Such mating is contrary to the will of Nature for a
higher breeding of all life. The precondition for this does not
lie in associating superior and inferior, but in the total victory
of the former. The stronger must dominate and not blend with the
weaker, thus sacrificing his own greatness. Only the born
weakling can view this as cruel, but he after all is only a weak
and limited man; for if this law did not prevail, any conceivable
higher development of organic living beings would be
unthinkable.
....Nature looks on calmly, with satisfaction, in fact. In the
struggle for daily bread all those who are weak and sickly or
less determined succumb, while the struggle of the males for the
female grants the right or opportunity to propagate only to the
healthiest. And struggle is always a means for improving a
species' health and power of resistance and, therefore, a cause
of its higher development.
if so, then how can
you say hitler used darwin?
I'm thinking of a 2-dimentional object having 3 sides, with its
interior angles adding up to 180 degrees. What object am I thinking
of?
Do I have to mention the name of the object I'm thinking of for you to
know what object I'm thinking of?
Or is merely my characterization of the object (without my mentioning
the object's name) sufficient for you to know what object I'm thinking
of?
Hitler embraced Darwinian natural selection
and the christian church murdered jews and 2,000,000 blacks during the
slave trade without benefit of darwin.
Refs? How many Jews, and upon what rationale?
.
|
