Why is it that poeple who don't believe in evolution

[Jackpine Radical]

are so eager to endorse social Darwinism?

[foxfeet]

1. 'cause they're like, uh, stupid.

[ClassWarrior]

2. C'mon, JR... Evolve!

:hi:

NGU.

[Jackpine Radical]

10. I'm done with that.

For me, it's devolution from here on out.

[hobbit709]

3. Because, just like in their bibles, they pick and choose what they agree with.

[cali]

4. I wish people wouldn't use 'believe' and 'evolution'

in the same sentence. And social dawinism doesn't really have anything at all to do with evolution or Darwin.

[wryter2000]

8. Even worse

Some people say things like "believe in Darwin." Charles Darwin isn't the point. The fact that the overwhelming preponderous of data support the theory is.

I once read an Amazon review of S. J. Gould's "The Mismeasure of Man" that said (I think this is verbatim) "He's betrayed Darwin!" Good Lord.

[Jackpine Radical]

9. First, I didn't say "have faith" in evolution.

How else should I describe people who don't accept the idea that the life forms in today's world are derived from different life forms that existed in the past?

And I'm quite aware of the connections between "social Darwinism" (Spencerianism?) and Darwinism.

I was trying to ask an ironic question, not immerse myself in a treatise on evolutionary theory.

[MNDemNY]

5. Stupid is as stupid does.

[wtmusic]

6. Rich people who don't believe in evolution endorse SD

The poor ones think God handed them their lot.

But it's an excellent question you raise. :thumbsup:

[wryter2000]

7. Amazing, isn't it?

And I'm with cali...social Darwinism has nothing to do with Darwin's theory or evolution. In fact, what we call social Darwinism predates Darwin. It's probably been with us ever since society created haves and have-nots.

I think what causes the strange link of social Darwinism and refusal to accept the obvious reality of evolution has to do with the modern conflation of pseudo-Christianity and the authoritan personality. Modern "conservatives" think the people on top are there because they're naturally superior to the people who aren't on top, and they've also embraced an anti-scientific type of "Christianity."

[Jackpine Radical]

12. Social "Darwinism" was, AFAIK, first formally postulated by Herbert Spencer,

who published on the topic a couple of years before Darwin. IIRC Spencer was a Lamarckian.

[Puzzler]

11. ... and I assume that none of them ever get new flu shots every year...

... after all, there is no way that viruses ever evolve/mutate is there? (sarcasm)

[DonEBrook]

13. Some of them will rationalize it saying "it's still a virus, it hasn't turned into a cat"

:eyes:

[Jackpine Radical]

15. Exactly.

[Jackpine Radical]

14. Oh, some of them acknowledge "micro-evolution," minor changes within

a species. They then cling to an outmoded, Linnaeian definition of species, and claim that one species can't arise from another.

Angels on the heads of pins, postulating epicycles on the epicycles, twisting their perceptions of reality to preserve their particular take on Biblical literalism...kinda fun to watch. Do you still have any of those folk left in Canada (excluding the Mad Douks), or have you foisted them all off on us?

[DonEBrook]

16. Yes that's what I was getting at. The ironic thing is, if a dog "gave birth" to a cat or

something equally distinct, it would do more to DISprove our current understanding of evolution than it could possibly reinforce it!
yikes

[Jackpine Radical]

17. Makes you kinda want to punctuate their equilibrium, I say.

[DonEBrook]

18. LOL good one!

:thumbsup:

[PurityOfEssence]

19. It's all about specialness and selfishness

We can't be descended from inferior beings; we're BETTER than others and have the right to do as we please with our fellow creatures because our god told us we could. We were created as special, privileged creatures and have the right to fuck over all inferiors. That's why the good lord helps those who help themselves and that's why inferiors should be given no quarter.

Conservatism is a mixture of fear, selfishness and hatred of uncertainty or change. Darwinism reminds us that we're all more or less cut from the same cloth, and that disgusts those who need to be superior.

Your basic conundrum is fun to point out, but there IS actually a consistency to fuckyouism: it's a feeling of superiority and the correctness to subjugate others. If you didn't love god, you wouldn't exalt the superior; the superior are god's chosen, and that's why they shouldn't be constrained by mere laws or taxed to sustain the systems that disproportionately benefit them.

Peons should hold their filthy tongues and be glad they're suffered to exist at all, even if it IS merely to be exploited by those sitting at the table they may hopefully get a place at someday.