So You Think You Are a Darwinian?

Royal Institute of Philosophy ^ | 1994 | D. C. Stove

[Ethan Clive Osgoode]

ping

[scripter]

Thanks for the last 3 pings!

[balrog666]

In my experience, "Darwinian" or "Darwinist" as a term, exists only in the vocabulary of anti-evolution Creationists.

[balrog666]

Bilge for your mill.

[Junior]

It's the old "argument from consequences." It doesn't matter whether or not evolution is true, it must be suppressed "for the good of the children."

[Phaedrus]

Darwinian sophistry and rhetoric bump ...

[Charles H. (The_r0nin)]

I'm really glad the author decided to provide the context in which each of the above statements were made, along with the scientific theories upon which they are based. Oooops! He didn't, did he?

Sorry, but it doesn't matter what one person says in an out-of-context quote. Find the scientific theory that has been proposed for each of the "quotes" above and attack that. Evolution is not an argument from personality, as the above author would have it...

Never mind... I almost started to debate this, until I realized that honest debate has nothing to do with your post...

[jlogajan]

Oh slay he the mighty strawman!

[TightSqueeze]

In my experience, "Darwinian" or "Darwinist" as a term, exists only in the vocabulary of anti-evolution Creationists.

This whole article stinks, reminds me of the "Who Wrote This, Ted Kazinsky(sp?) Or Al Gore" article, pompous straw man BS.

[and the horse you rode in on]

CRAP

The fact that some Darwinians believe some or all of these things has nothing to do with whether or not anyone else has to believe any of them to be a Darwinian.

In todays's context, as the article stated, Darwinism means a belief than man descended from animals without divine intervention, and that is believed by most educated people.

No one can first tell me what I believe and then tell me I am wrong. They must ask me what I believe and then try to convince me that is wrong.

[longshadow]

Strawman placemarker!

[PatrickHenry]

"Not going to waste much time here" placemarker.

[Cicero]

Interesting article, elegantly argued. It takes a different approach from most anti-Darwinist literature that has been published recently.

Not that it will persuade any Darwinists. Nothing will.

[PatrickHenry]

From the article:
4. Homosexuality in social animals is a form of sibling-altruism: that is, your homosexuality is a way of helping your brothers and sisters to raise more children.

This is actually one of the author's 10 items which he claims that "Darwinists" believe. I have never encountered anyone on the evolution side of this debate who believes such a nonsensical proposition -- or who has even considered it. This may be the most grotesque example of setting up a strawman I've ever seen. I think the author is delusional. (But then, he's a creationist, so what else would we expect?)

[longshadow]

This may be the most grotesque example of setting up a strawman I've ever seen. I think the author is delusional. (But then, he's a creationist, so what else would we expect?)

Have you ever considered that this article is just an elaborate satire, and the Creationists, who latched onto it thinking it was real, are the butt of the joke?

[f.Christian]

Straw man // darwin ==== straw science // evolution !

Evolution is -- full on -- brainwashing (( redacting // deleting conservatism )) and . . .

indoctrinating // programming LIBERALISM // lies // bias all through America // society ! ! !

All unashamedly on the FR too ==== "fraud // curruption" ==== UNADULTERED tyranny !

[ggekko]

That is not true. All recent proponents of evolutionary theory (Dawkins, Gould, et al) call themselves neo-Darwinists becuase they all profess fealty to the mechanism of natural selction as the prinicipal evolutionary mechanism.

All of their theories (saltationism, selfish gene) suffer from the same defects as outlined in the article. Dawkin's theory, stripped of its its scientific pretensions, becomes even more fantastic as it is a form of vitalism similar to Bergson's "elan vital".

[Dataman]

Darwinism says many things, especially about our species, which are too obviously false to be believed by any educated person

I knew I was going to like this article.

[Dataman]

In my experience, "Darwinian" or "Darwinist" as a term, exists only in the vocabulary of anti-evolution Creationists.

That experience must be limited, since it can be found in a dictionary.