Eugenics supporters?

[m_huber]

Which one is incorrect?

I assume that you're kidding, but just to be sure, Darwin was reading Lyell's work on Uniformitarianism in geology, then he applied the same principle to biology. The idea isn't morally significant. It rained last year, it rains this year, it's going to rain next year. No big deal.

To say that it is one of the vile evils of evolution is historically inaccurate, and to say that it is morally wrong is to misunderstand what it is.

 

[CFLarsen]

I have read Margaret Sanger.

I have, too.

Please explain how Planned Parenthood is founded in eugenics.

Ever wonder why the artist renditions of "cave-men" have big lips and dark skin?

It is about the promotion of the idea.

Was there no racism before Darwin, yes or no?

 

[JEROME DA GNOME]

I have, too.

Please explain how Planned Parenthood is founded in eugenics.

If you have read her you throughly understand.

Who was her husband?

Was there no racism before Darwin, yes or no?

There is no relevance in this question.

The answer is yes.

Now answer my question.

Why do the artist renditions of "cave-men" have big lips and dark skin?

This question does have relevance to our talk.

 

[fuelair]

I am pro-Eugene. That sounds similar.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nick_Dinsmore

Actually, the only time I went through Eugene (Oregon, I assume) it was a nice place.

Eugenics, on the other hand just has kind of a Deutschland uber alles feel to it, so I will have to take a pass on that. Keep in mind, at best Eugenics ASSumes that the people doing it really, really know without question what humans need to survive as a species. I fail to believe that is likely.

 

[Diagoras]

Why do the artist renditions of "cave-men" have big lips and dark skin?

If we're talking about old renditions, then the answer is probably that white people from that time thought blacks to be more "primitive", as virtually every European society did before the modern era. If anything, that's a notion that a thorough understanding of evolution has helped to disprove. I haven't seen any such renditions by serious modern scientists.

 

[JEROME DA GNOME]

If we're talking about old renditions, then the answer is probably that white people from that time thought blacks to be more "primitive", as virtually every European society did before the modern era. If anything, that's a notion that a thorough understanding of evolution has helped to disprove. I haven't seen any such renditions by serious modern scientists.

2/24/2005

http://metamedia.stanford.edu/~mshanks/weblog/?m=200502

 

[EGarrett]

Which simply means what I already said, that any belief can be taken to unethical extremes.
Right? The point is that it doesn't need to be. Take the embryonic stem cell issue for example. Bush opposed it, Reeves died without it ever being tried on him. Today they have found other ways to garner stem cells which doesn't involve human embryos. If the whole stem cell idea would have been rejected based on its perceived unethical requirements, then the present discovery would have been impossible. It's similar to outlawing all firearms simply because of their misuse potential. Agreed?

I see it as simply a matter of descriptive versus prescriptive. The theory of evolution describes WHAT happens, it does not mean that you SHOULD become actively involved in it. Likewise, the theory of gravity tells you that if you jump off a building, you'll fall to the ground. That doesn't mean that it's saying you SHOULD jump off buildings and fall to the ground.

The question is mind-numbingly ignorant.

 

[JEROME DA GNOME]

I see it as simply a matter of descriptive versus prescriptive. The theory of evolution describes WHAT happens, it does not mean that you SHOULD become actively involved in it. Likewise, the theory of gravity tells you that if you jump off a building, you'll fall to the ground. That doesn't mean that it's saying you SHOULD jump off buildings and fall to the ground.

The question is mind-numbingly ignorant.

You think it is ignorant to ask if mankind; having the ability, should or should not manipulate the gene pool of the species ?

 

[EGarrett]

You think it is ignorant to ask if mankind; having the ability, should or should not manipulate the gene pool of the species ?

No, and I never said that. I said that the THEORY OF EVOLUTION makes NO statement on whether or not we should.

 

[JEROME DA GNOME]

No, and I never said that. I said that the THEORY OF EVOLUTION makes NO statement on whether or not we should.

OK; how do you answer the question?

 

[EGarrett]

OK; how do you answer the question?

I'd be happy to implement eugenics...as soon as someone has a single remotely useful standard for predicting what will make a great person. I haven't seen one...and in fact, many of the greatest minds and human beings we've ever seen have been deaf (Edison, Beethoven), disabled (Roosevelt, Hawking), born into complete poverty (Fischer, Ramanujan), or otherwise in situations that a eugenics program would dictate that they shouldn't have been born. Let alone how many absolute geniuses were thought to be functionally retarded due to their bizarre behavior as children.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Planned Parenthood is founded in eugenics.

First you told us how the Federal Reserve works. And you were wrong.

Now you're going to tell us about Planned Parenthood? This should be entertaining!

 

[CFLarsen]

If you have read her you throughly understand.

Please explain how Planned Parenthood is founded in eugenics.

Who was her husband?

Huh? What does that have to do with anything?

There is no relevance in this question.

The answer is yes.

Which means that racism is incorrect. It cannot be attributed to the Theory of Evolution.

Which ones in the list (Abortion, humanism, racism, paganism, euthanasia, radical feminist movement, nazism, sexual perversion, and uniformitarianism) can directly be attributed to the theory of evolution?

Now answer my question.

Why do the artist renditions of "cave-men" have big lips and dark skin?

This question does have relevance to our talk.

They don't.

Your call.

 

[delphi_ote]

We're getting overrun with creationist stupid of late. WTF?

 

[PogoPedant]

I looked at that image... I can't believe the list...

Abortion, humanism, racism, paganism, euthanasia, radical feminist movement, nazism, sexual perversion, and uniformitarianism.

Oh, the evils of evolution.

Paganism?! How on earth did they get to paganism from evolution? I predict Olympic gold in mental contortions.

 

[CFLarsen]

We're getting overrun with creationist stupid of late. WTF?

They evolve.

 

[Soapy Sam]

I think before planning a better human race, we better have a better idea of what "better" means.

 

[Mojo]

They evolve.

Do they? All we see is the same old fallacious arguments trotted out again and again (as evidenced in this case by the old illustration of a tree posted in this thread).

And they still don't even understand what the theory they're trying to attack actually is.

T'ai, it may come as a surprise to you that Darwin's theory was the theory of evolution by natural selection. Eugenics is deliberate selection. People had been selectively breeding animals and plants to produce breeds with specific traits for hundreds, perhaps thousands, of years before Darwin published his theory. Selective breeding is not a consequence of Darwin's theory (it's part of the evidence for it).

And the fact that you don't like the implications of a theory, or what you imagine the implications of the theory to be, has no bearing on whether the theory is true.

 

[CFLarsen]

Do they? All we see is the same old fallacious arguments trotted out again and again (as evidenced in this case by the old illustration of a tree posted in this thread).

And they still don't even understand what the theory they're trying to attack actually is.

Psst.....it was a joke.

T'ai, it may come as a surprise to you that Darwin's theory was the theory of evolution by natural selection. Eugenics is deliberate selection. People had been selectively breeding animals and plants to produce breeds with specific traits for hundreds, perhaps thousands, of years before Darwin published his theory. Selective breeding is not a consequence of Darwin's theory (it's part of the evidence for it).

Not just animals and plants, but humans, too.

 

[GodMark2]

I am pro-Eugene.

I think Eugene, Oregon is a nice town.

Count another pro Eugener here. It's quite lovely on the spring, when the cold Oregon winter rains give way to the warm Oregon spring rains.