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.
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.
LOL
This post wins the most ridiculous and misinformed post of the year award. It looks more like parody than a real post.
Darwinism is liked to Satan worship and blood sacrfifice? How so? Evolution by natural selection is disproved? Show us.
Social Darwinism is a "front" and I should have labelled that used by Zionists to control the weak minded and those easily corrupted. IF you put into the minds of the weak that they are some form of superior race, then they will be willing to do anything to become the "ruling class"- thus resulting in huge bloodshed.
If you look up what freemasons must do as part of their secretive religion you will see why it is linked to Satan worship. Don't believe me? Look it up bro, you'll find all your answers.
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
I was an athiest and this was pretty much how i viewed war.
format_quote Originally Posted by Ubeyde
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.
This is what I could never understand about athiests. Even when I was one others would say these things were wrong. But with out a god or religion to follow then all that is left is natural selection. It seemed like the perfect version of natural law to me where the masses of the weak are there to be exploited by the strong just as nature intended.
Even when I was one others would say these things were wrong. But with out a god or religion to follow then all that is left is natural selection
Lavadog, I'm sorry to see you calling yourself a sociopath. Most of us would disagree with the above (as you noted). Regardless of how they arose, we do have ethics and values.
And none of the above has anything whatsoever to do with evolution or Charles Darwin.
Last edited by Pygoscelis; 04-15-2011 at 11:17 PM.
Lavadog, I'm sorry to see you calling yourself a sociopath. Most of us would disagree with the above (as you noted). Regardless of how they arose, we do have ethics and values.
But what are the ethics and values based on. Why should someone follow them if they don't believe in god. We have prisons full of people who claim they were born to kill so thats what they will continue to do until they die. Are they wrong if there is no real meaning to life. And it was not like the other athiests were godless philanthropists, they would kill with ease as long as they thought it was ok.
Lavadog, I'm sorry to see you calling yourself a sociopath. Most of us would disagree with the above (as you noted). Regardless of how they arose, we do have ethics and values.
And none of the above has anything whatsoever to do with evolution or Charles Darwin.
never knew atheism had a pope who spoke for most atheists.
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
But what are the ethics and values based on. Why should someone follow them if they don't believe in god. We have prisons full of people who claim they were born to kill so thats what they will continue to do until they die. Are they wrong if there is no real meaning to life. And it was not like the other athiests were godless philanthropists, they would kill with ease as long as they thought it was ok.
I see this stance taken every now and then by a theist. The idea that without God there can be no morality and that if they lost their faith... they'd be doing all sorts of anti-social and destructive and cruel things. It is textbook sociopathy and I do not think those who speak it really mean it. I don't think you do.
The above also shows a confusion of obedience for morality and drive directly into the Euthyphro Dilema: Is good good because God wills it or does God will it because it is good?
If you honestly believed that God spoke to you and told you to kill your child as a sacrifice, or commit genocide on the nation next door, or fly a plane into a building, would you do it?
That is actually one of my main sticking points with Islam and Christianity. They appear to be primarily about obedience to power and ethics seem an afterthought.
To answer the question posed above, where do ethics and morality come from? I would suggest social convention, mutual self interest, and empathy.
To answer the question posed above, where do ethics and morality come from? I would suggest social convention, mutual self interest, and empathy.
I understand what you are saying but this always bugged me even when I was an athiest. I have met sociopaths before with zero empathy. Maybe most people would not like what they do but without a god I don't see why they should care. If there is no god to actually tell me its wrong why should I care. Or a better question is how do you personally find the ability to care.
I understand what you are saying but this always bugged me even when I was an athiest. I have met sociopaths before with zero empathy. Maybe most people would not like what they do but without a god I don't see why they should care. If there is no god to actually tell me its wrong why should I care. Or a better question is how do you personally find the ability to care.
We have the police for Sociopaths !.! But of course, there are things like Buddhism, Kantianism, Utilitaranism, that offer a brand of ethical behavior outside of God which a sociopath can follow if he find them convincing. And as Pygo stated, if you need God to tell you not to rape and kill others then you might be a sociopath, so please stay Muslim :P
We have the police for Sociopaths !.! But of course, there are things like Buddhism, Kantianism, Utilitaranism, that offer a brand of ethical behavior outside of God which a sociopath can follow if he find them convincing. And as Pygo stated, if you need God to tell you not to rape and kill others then you might be a sociopath, so please stay Muslim :P
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.
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.
You are again equating obedience with morality. The question you are asking is why should we be good without reward/punishment or without fear of authority. The reason is because we have moral values and seek to better ourselves accordingly. If you can't see that, then you really do call sociopathy into question.
One area of research that may interest you given your questions above is that on "mirror neurons". Do a google on it and read a few articles. Its pretty cool stuff.
We were mocking the OP because it has nothing to do with Charles Darwin and is charged with a lot of hateful straw men. That tends to evoke a reaction from people. It would be like somebody starting a thread on how "Islam is terrorist" etc.
I was making fun of the OP because theists always try to tie "Social Darwinism" back to Darwin as if he covertly created it or evolution is somehow responsible for it. Evolution is wholly apart from "social Darwinism" and the dovetail into Zionists that sealed the deal.
As far as people being morally responsible with a God, LavaDog is somewhat correct in that without some kind of arbitrary law giver it is hard to establish a "objective morality" to hold everyone accountable to which dove tales into moral nihilism, but a law giver God comes with its own problems in that as far as we know all the organized religion's Gods have told their followers to do things that people find morally objectionable. Some individuals claim that God told them to do other morally reprehensible acts without being in an organized religion. There is also the Euthyphro dilemma which religionists haven't come up with a satisfactory answer yet.
Let me ask you a question LavaDog. Lets say that tomorrow some how Islam is proven wrong conclusively some plagerized parts of the Quran are found or Muhammad's diary was found with descriptions of how he was deceiving or something conclusive and it was proven without a doubt that Islam was a fake. What do you think would happen?
without some kind of arbitrary law giver it is hard to establish a "objective morality"
It is no easier to establish "objective morality" with a law giver. You just have their subjective morality imposed on others. Tyrants can lay out lots of rules and regulations they want followed on pain of death. That doesn't make anything any more objectively moral.
The reason is because we have moral values and seek to better ourselves accordingly.
If humans are not divine creations or whatever, then you would have to agree we are just another species of animals. In nature weak or sick animals are not looked at with sympathy or pity. Predators don't see a calf and decide it will take pity on it. It sees it as easy prey and kills it for its food. The weak in that case was there to serve the will and needs of the strong. Why should we be different? What absolutism are we going to use as moral compass if not some form of organized thought . Maybe Dr. mengele did not agree with you on your moral values but most of the medical data we got after the war was from him. He got results and bettered medical science, why should we consider him evil? The label sociopath means nothing if we don't have set morals to base it on. It would be like someone on here calling you a kaffir or whatever I don't think you would really care.
Imagining humans to be "divine creations" doesn't in any way solve that problem (if it really was a problem, which it is not).
You have yet to respond to the observation of your confusing obedience with morality. Would you do something like kill your child or do genocide on your neighbours or fly a plane into a building if you truly believed Allah wished it?
Last edited by Pygoscelis; 04-17-2011 at 04:00 AM.
I was making fun of the OP because theists always try to tie "Social Darwinism" back to Darwin as if he covertly created it or evolution is somehow responsible for it.
Nobody likes to remember that darwin was a racist that said quite plainly that blacks were inferior to whites. Observing blacks and deciding that they were inferior did help him complete his theory.
format_quote Originally Posted by Verdetequiero
Let me ask you a question LavaDog. Lets say that tomorrow some how Islam is proven wrong conclusively some plagerized parts of the Quran are found or Muhammad's diary was found with descriptions of how he was deceiving or something conclusive and it was proven without a doubt that Islam was a fake. What do you think would happen?
Good question. I guess eventually people would put all faith in science and wait for the singularity or something. But an immediate effect would be people devleoping complete nihilism. Which would bring me back to my point that without an eye in the sky keeping tabs on us why should anybody care about anything? Riot, loot, pillage, rape, kill, why not?
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
czgibson liked this post
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks