Asalamu Alaykum wa Rahmutalahi wa barakatu. All praises due to Allah, the Exalted Most High.
Today I shall attempt to give you some little insight which I posses about Social Darwinism, its practictioners, its meanings and the effects of it on society.
Social Darwinism, what is it?
Social Darwinism is the belief, and almost a religion formed over the disproved theories of a man named Charles Darwin.
He believed that every specie of animal, be it Human or fish, etc. had evolved throughout the ages through a process of Natural Selection.
Natural Selection is the process, according to theory, of species evolving, whereby the weakest gene is removed from a gene pool and only the strongest reside. Therefore, the genes of any particular species of animal will constantly be filtered and it will result in a "Super-form" of that particular animal, whereby it is vastly superior to its predecessors.
Now, let's see how that relates with Humans. If the theory of Natural Selection did exist, then for every Human blood shed should be looked forward to and not to be disheartened by it. In fact, every war- every battle should be looked forward to because we, as humans, have the oppurtunity to "clean" our gene pool of inferior races.
Wow, sounds very extreme doesn't it? This is because it is very extreme.
If you look back at the history of War you will see how it has advanced. Before the last few hundred or so years, when war was fought, it was fought out between the armies of two conflicting nations, however, as of the First World War, the harming of innocents on both nations has become commonplace. Instead of fighting the wars on the battlefield- war now involves innocents and those who want nothing to do with fighting, e.g. the disabled, elderly, women, children, etc.
Now you may ask why war has evolved so?
The reasoning behind the evolution of the way in which wars are conducted in Modern Day is because people who are practitioners of Social Darwinism believe that their race is the "most pure" and "the strongest" and therefore they should be deemed the Ruling Race.
There are many modern day examples of people who practice this "faith", some are listed below:
Adolph Hitler (Nazism)
Stalin
Zionism in general (however, they use a different method of believing and accounting for the mass loss of innocent blood shed)
Hitler believed that his nation of Germans was the most technologically and sociologically advanced race on the planet. And, therefore, should be the Ruling Race.
Therefore, the Nazi-German party used the theory of Darwinism to kill countless civilians throughout Europe. Wherever the soldiers went, they killed those in the way and torched the dwellings of the people. They would, as well as all of the parties involved in the War, use bombing raids, chemical warfare to extinguish eachothers populations. Millions died.
Darwinism is actually linked to a form of Shaitan worship. I.e. blood sacrifices, etc. in order to please Shaitan. It is also linked to these people making preparations for the coming of the Dajjal. Look up the reasoning behind the "BP oil spill" and the "Operation Market Garden" so called disasters.. and check their dates as these will correspond to something very relevent.
I will not go into this further- i.e. the ideals of zionists, etc. so it is up to the reader as to look into these subjects.
I see your point, but I am on the Jews side here.. What was done to them in the World Wars deserves sympathy.
Yes it was bad but it was not a jewish holocaust. People seem to forget another five million died. I think we should feel just as bad for the homosexuals, plus the first people who were put into the camps were catholics.
This is the never ending debate I have with athiests though. You say sociopaths can follow those beliefs but why? There are no repercussions so why would they bother? Without a god why would anybody care? But really the only reason I started this was because the only other posts on here were making fun of the thread starter and I thought that was unnecessary. So im pretty sure im not a sociopath.
it's possible for Bob to simply enjoy helping others or simply enjoy acting out his perceived moral duties. Those are rewards in themselves. For everyone else, we have prison !
Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle.
-Plato
As has already been said not only is natural selection not 'all that is left', it's probably pretty much irrelevant in this context since homo sapiens wiped out the Neanderthals! Of those suggested I think 'mutual self-interest' combined with sufficient intelligence to realize what that was is perfectly sufficient.
Please show us here the evidence that homo sapiens wiped out the neanderthals.
it's possible for Bob to simply enjoy helping others or simply enjoy acting out his perceived moral duties. Those are rewards in themselves. For everyone else, we have prison !
Yes but right now we have prisons full of people who just don't care. They admit that they feel they were born to kill and will continue to do so. Perhaps one day Bob decides the meaning of life is no longer to help others but to take as many people down with him as he can. Would he not just be following his own path in life?
What would it take to convince you would be a good starting point, but I don't think evolution is the idea of the thread.
why dont you just prove evolution for him - It shouldnt be that hard.
Do you think the pious don't sin?
They merely:
Veiled themselves and didn't flaunt it
Sought forgiveness and didn't persist
Took ownership of it and don't justify it
And acted with excellence after they had erred - Ibn al-Qayyim
Please show us here the evidence that homo sapiens wiped out the neanderthals.
Please conjour up the weeks it would take me to do the necessary research, and I'd be happy to do so! The most obvious evidence is simply that the world today contains something like 7 billion homo sapiens.. and zero homo neanderthalensis when the two species/sub-species most significant direct competitors were each other.
We can't be sure what happened, of course. It certainly seems very unlikely any sort of planned extermination took place, but most authorities seem to believe competition with homo sapiens was largely responsible for the extinction of the neanderthals; we were just the more successful species (or according to some, sub-species) when in direct competion for resources. Other factors could have been rapid fluctuations in climate, absortion into homo sapiens as a result of interbreeding, or even volcanic super-eruptions.
If you have evidence in favour of any other theories, please feel free to show us here.
Yes but right now we have prisons full of people who just don't care. They admit that they feel they were born to kill and will continue to do so. Perhaps one day Bob decides the meaning of life is no longer to help others but to take as many people down with him as he can. Would he not just be following his own path in life?
Yeah that's exactly right.
Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle.
-Plato
why dont you just prove evolution for him - It shouldnt be that hard.
Far from not being that hard, it's actually impossible. Just as it is with any other scientific theory. You can only disprove a scientific theory, not prove it. So you go ahead and 'prove' general relativity or quantum mechanics and we might think about 'proving' evolution.
All you can actually do is provide evidence in support of a scientific theory. And I'm afraid that, whether the creationist ostriches like it or not, evolution by natural selection is probably the best evidenced theory in the history of science. Any suggestion to the contrary is - frankly - a fairy story believed only by those with no understanding as to what science actually is.
To repeat the point, though, 'social Darwinism' is just a label, it has nothing to do with evolution by natural selection.
It isn't hard at all. All you need is a microscope, a petri dish, and some bacteria.
Or if you'd like to see it with bigger animals, then all you need is a few million years. You got the time? Let's begin
waiting..........
Do you think the pious don't sin?
They merely:
Veiled themselves and didn't flaunt it
Sought forgiveness and didn't persist
Took ownership of it and don't justify it
And acted with excellence after they had erred - Ibn al-Qayyim
Nobody says that Magic man in the sky did it but after a million years we find out that God was behind it all - we win - Game over. Your side loses
Do you think the pious don't sin?
They merely:
Veiled themselves and didn't flaunt it
Sought forgiveness and didn't persist
Took ownership of it and don't justify it
And acted with excellence after they had erred - Ibn al-Qayyim
Far from not being that hard, it's actually impossible. Just as it is with any other scientific theory. You can only disprove a scientific theory, not prove it. So you go ahead and 'prove' general relativity or quantum mechanics and we might think about 'proving' evolution.
All you can actually do is provide evidence in support of a scientific theory. And I'm afraid that, whether the creationist ostriches like it or not, evolution by natural selection is probably the best evidenced theory in the history of science. Any suggestion to the contrary is - frankly - a fairy story believed only by those with no understanding as to what science actually is.
To repeat the point, though, 'social Darwinism' is just a label, it has nothing to do with evolution by natural selection.
wth?
Where are you pulling that from? There are other theories in science which have far more convincing evidence with no alternative explanations. Evolution has alternative explanation since changes in DNA (one example of what gator so boastfully posted) does not mean any relationship with the previous configuration.
Help me to escape from this existence
I yearn for an answer... can you help me?
I'm drowning in a sea of abused visions and shattered dreams
In somnolent illusion... I'm paralyzed
It's nice to see you backtracking from such certainty as this:
I don't think the context of my initial comment suggested any actual or intended attempt at academic rigour?
and unlike you, I dont pretend I know what happened. The neanderthals could have died out from diseases that only affected them, etc.
I was not 'pretending' anything. It was a one line reference to the prevailing theory, not an academic paper.
format_quote Originally Posted by mad_scientist
There are other theories in science which have far more convincing evidence with no alternative explanations.
Name one, or at least one of anything like the same significance.
Evolution has alternative explanation since changes in DNA ... does not mean any relationship with the previous configuration.
Er, what? Could you please explain what you mean by that? Or better still link to a scientific paper that explains and advocates it as an alternative to evolution by natural selection?
I don't think the context of my initial comment suggested any actual or intended attempt at academic rigour?
it was certainly NOT an attempt at academic rigour.
format_quote Originally Posted by Trumble
I was not 'pretending' anything. It was a one line reference to the prevailing theory, not an academic paper.
Modern humans "wiping out" neanderthals is not even the prevailing theory. Any sufficiently educated people would know this.
And there is no such thing as "the prevailing theory how neanderthals died out" anyway. There are theories, but still remain that: theories, and none of these theories at the moment can be proven. Is neanderthals your pink unicorn and flying spaghetti monsters?
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Sign Up
Quote
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Bookmarks