| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"david ford" |
| Date: |
17 Oct 2005 01:21:24 PM |
| Object: |
Re: CA211.1: Popper on evolution's falsifiability |
Diane L wrote:
david ford wrote:
Bob wrote:
On 13 Oct 2005 "david ford" <dford3@gl.umbc.edu> wrote:
theological disputes among German Protestants; Nazi concentration
camps for Catholics and Protestants
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1129228612.176548.107730%40z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com
_The Myth of Hitler's Pope: How Pope Pius XII Rescued Jews from the
Nazis_ by David G. Dalin
http://www.regnery.com/books/mythhitler.html
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0895260344/102-3856728-7232115?v=glance
http://www.the-tidings.com/2005/1007/difference.htm
Hitler's debt to American eugenicists
http://www.waragainsttheweak.com/offSiteArchive/HitlerDebtToAmerica.html
Hitler embraced Darwinian natural selection
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1129143372.689763.127020%40g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
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'"?
You think Hitler was a Tennysonist?
The phrase "Nature, red in tooth and claw" comes from 'In Memoriam', written
by Alfred, Lord Tennyson and published in 1850.
Not really, no.
Do you think Darwin "was a Tennysonist"?
Darwin wasn't nearly as original a 'thinker' as he would like you to
believe he was.
Barzun, Jacques. 1941. _Darwin, Marx, Wagner: Critique of a Heritage_
(Boston: Little, Brown and Company), 420pp., 47, 49, 51, 59, 61, 70,
87-92.
1987 Hsu
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-3a18k3F66sgjpU1%40individual.net
Van Valen denies that Darwin espoused social
Darwinism. I disagree, but I shall not quibble over
the issue. The fact remains that Darwinism has a
social origin. As a recent student of Darwinism has
pointed out, "the extrapolation from Darwinism to
either humanity or society are not separable from
Darwin's own views, nor are they chronologically
subsequent. They are integral" (Young, 1985).
Darwin did not fool all of his contemporaries. I cite
Frederick Engels in my Reply to Schoch's Comment
(above) that the whole Darwinist teaching of the
struggle for existence is but a "conjurer's trick."
Arguments on the basis of the social philosophy of
his time were the basis for Darwin's interpretation of
the history of life, and his theory was then
transferred back to provide the scientific basis in
support of social Darwinism as the eternal law of
human society. "The puerility of this procedure is so
obvious," Engels wrote in 1875, "that not a word
need be said about it."
I wish Engels had dwelt more on the "puerility of this
procedure," so as to show the true color of "the
argument of noise and sneers with which
(Darwinists) tried to put down... everyone... who did
not subscribe to the infallibility of the God Darwin
and his prophet Huxley," as Tristram said in 1860.
Darwin has made mistakes, and his mistakes have
brought misery to humanity. Facing the bias and
obstinacy of Darwinists, I feel almost tempted to join
my colleague, Paul Feyerabend (1975, p. 7), who
proposed to lead "three cheers to the
fundamentalists in California who succeeded in
having a dogmatic formulation of the theory of
evolution removed from the textbooks and an
account of Genesis included."
.
|
|
| User: "Robert J. Kolker" |
|
| Title: Re: CA211.1: Popper on evolution's falsifiability |
17 Oct 2005 02:00:05 PM |
|
|
david ford wrote:
Not really, no.
Do you think Darwin "was a Tennysonist"?
Darwin wasn't nearly as original a 'thinker' as he would like you to
believe he was.
Right. And Einstein did not come up with relativity theory all by
himself, either.
Darwin was the first to put a lot of ideas which were in circulation
together in an insightful way. Alfered Wallace also did the same thing.
Bob Kolker
.
|
|
|
| User: "david ford" |
|
| Title: Re: CA211.1: Popper on evolution's falsifiability |
18 Oct 2005 01:29:32 PM |
|
|
Robert J. Kolker wrote:
david ford wrote:
Not really, no.
Do you think Darwin "was a Tennysonist"?
Darwin wasn't nearly as original a 'thinker' as he would like you to
believe he was.
Right. And Einstein did not come up with relativity theory all by
himself, either.
Agreed.
Darwin was the first to put a lot of ideas which were in circulation
together in an insightful way. Alfered Wallace also did the same thing.
Did Darwin have any original ideas in his _Origin_, as far as you know?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
