Posted on 01/27/2006 11:04:17 AM PST by Lindykim
The "connection" was explained in post #6. Marx was grasping for rationalizations.
The fact remains that evolution is not and could not be the "basis" for Communism, since Communism was conceived and described in detail *before* evolution.
Furthermore, anyone with even the slightest grasp of evolution has no trouble at all grasping that evolution is a far better "basis" for laissez faire *capitalism* than any form of communism. The parallels between evolutionary processes and capitalism are uncanny, actually.
Meanwhile, it's amusing to note that *creationism* is actually a better match for communism, because both involve systems created and managed by a central "planning commission", and both involve the "central planner" being the writer of "the rules" and the arbiter of who deserves to get what, and what is required of them.
Frankly, only an idiot could conclude that evolutionary biology in any way supports communism. I suppose that's why so many creationists swallow such a foolish notion so uncritically, and show no signs whatsoever of having given it even a moment of real thought.
"You deny that ideas evolve?"
I deny that Darwin had anything to do with Marx's ideas.
No, the "desperation" is your frantic attempts to smear evolutinary biology by association, because you can't deal with it on the evidence or by arguing the science.
IOW, do you believe that animals do not evolve?
I'll bite Ol'Dan. I believe God created the universe and all that is in it between 11 and 15 billion years ago. He began the process of life on Earth after he created it about 4 billion years ago. When He began it I don't know. How He began it I don't know. I lean more toward Him creating many things much as they are and so I do not believe in macro evolution. I believe more in Him creating a variability within life to work with micro evolution. That is the variability within the species that allows for variances with breeding to change traits so that (for example) beak lengths of birds can change depending on their environment but the bird will not evolve into a duck because environmental changes would require it.
For instance when you discuss chihuahuas and mastiffs it is important to remember that they developed at the hands of an intelligent designer for our uses rather than as a result of natural selection.
So Ol' Dan, I'm not sure if that means I'm a creationist or an evolutionist or maybe you'd just call me confused.
Which is lower, the chihuahua or the mastiff? The turtle or the chicken?
The ideas arose out of the ecosystem of ideas at the same time. We see examples of similar development in fossil classifaction all the time.
...except the obnoxious, belligerent, arrogant creationists the pro-evolution crowd is responding to...
The creationists fire off such abuse as:
Michael Moore is a pauper compared with that bunch. But I think you are exactly right about the effects of Darwinism, and its true source. No philosophy or religion has ever done as much damage to man's psyche, or his respect for his fellow man, as Darwinism has.Oh, right, that was *you*, you obnoxious snot.
When you guys get abuse, it's because you've earned it.
to give his more prestige
Quite a statement for Marx to make...that evolution was the basis for his theory...only for prestige. I guess you are a Freudian too and can guess his motives rather than believe that his words might come from a sincere compliment to a like-minded thinker?
There are many possible theories concerning the creation of the species that are very plausible...even including Darwin.
Could God have created exactly as outline in Genesis "and" could Dinosaurs have lived millions of years before Adam? The answer in one paradigm is yes.
God is the author of life, but also of all visible and invisible. Time is part of creation (God lives outside of created time...for that matter all that is created). Like throwing a rock into a lake, God could create and time unravel forward and backward as the ripple of the pond. From any perspective there is a real point of creation, but this does not have to be the same as what we see as the beginning of the timeline. To Adam, confined in time, he can only see along the timeline.
Again, only one paradigm that both can exist...but there are many others.
But, by fighting like ants on an anthill over intellectual superiority we miss the real meaning of life.
That's not a newspaper, there, Lindykim. That's a blog. You know how to post here. You don't link some personal web page to another site. That's dishonest. And the site you linked to is just another blog.
I guess I'm pretty sure you wrote this yourself. It's too bad you had to use a subterfuge to get it posted here.
And, yes, I found the Daley site all on my own. It's a site pretending to be a newspaper, when it's just another random blog.
That's not what it said. Try to read for comprehension next time.
If you're not even going to try to hold up your side of the conversation, why do you bother?
Go learn some science before you attempt to critique it. You're just making a fool of yourself, and wasting our time -- we have better things to do than correct your misinformation repeatedly.
The same goes for all the rest of the anti-evolution yammerers. I have yet to find one who actually knew enough about biology to not make elementary screwups in almost every utterance, and yet they presume to "lecture" everyone on what the biologists have "all wrong". It's one of the most pathetic things I've ever seen.
Of course I have evidence. Stephen Gould, bless his soul, might even call my theory a fact. The theory of evolution of ideas is not only a theory it is a fact.
Perfect. Thank you.
Okay. I stand corrected.
No, the article listed destruction which has happened in just this century alone.
Sigh. Show me where in the article they talk about the other worldview's end. ("However, the other worldview's end is destruction.")
Might I suggest that your public disource skills need some "evolution"? I am happy to respond to more highly evolved posts, thank you.
You have some ability to extract hidden clues from a narrative, wheher that narrative is verbal or fossil. Just remeber that both are from a Narrator.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.