Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

A Matter of Life and Death
Breakpoint ^ | 04 07 05 | Chuck Colson

Posted on 08/30/2005 6:57:20 AM PDT by Rhadaghast

Links to Further Information

A Matter of Life and Death From Darwin to Hitler August 30, 2005 In all our contemporary conflicts over the teaching of evolution in schools, there’s one question that nobody asks: To what does the embrace of Darwinism lead? Historian Richard Weikart explores that topic in a book called From Darwinto Hitler: Evolutionary Ethics, Eugenics, and Racism in Germany. Despite that provocative title, Weikart is no sensationalist. He’s not out to prove that Hitler and the Nazi party were directly inspired by Charles Darwin’s theories. But what Weikart does demonstrate, through exhaustive research, is that Darwin’s ideas about the origin of species helped create a culture that devalued human life. And in that culture, Nazism was able to thrive. Darwin wasn’t the first person to claim that the strong and healthy have higher value than the weak and sick, or that some races are inferior to others. Those ideas, Weikart says, were around long before Darwin. What Darwin provided was a scientific foundation for these beliefs. Weikart writes, “Only in the late nineteenth and especially the early twentieth century did significant debate erupt over issues relating to the sanctity of human life. … It was no mere coincidence that these contentious issues emerged at the same time that Darwinism was gaining an influence. Darwinism played an important role in this debate, for it altered many people’s conceptions of the importance and value of human life, as well as the significance of death.” And it wasn’t just the sanctity of life that came under attack. Darwinism also strengthened what Weikart calls “scientific racism,” the theory that some races were less fully evolved than others. Because of Darwin’s theories, leading scientists in the early part of the twentieth century felt emboldened to propose radical ideas about how the sick or members of other races should be treated. Even as we read them today, some of their statements still sound shocking in their willful ignorance. Several scientists, for example, compared the mentally ill to apes. Textbooks were written that allegedly demonstrated scientifically that Africans, Native Americans, and Australian aborigines were subhuman. The eugenics movement—advocated in America as well as Europe—was able to bring about the sterilization of thousands of supposedly “inferior” people. In that environment, a young Adolf Hitler found fertile soil for his radical ideas for the “super race.” Weikart could not trace those ideas directly to Darwin, as we have little evidence of which authors Hitler read and admired. But in his days in Vienna and Munich, theories about racial inequality were everywhere. As Weikart says, “Eugenics and euthanasia … were embraced by a diverse crowd of secular social reformers,” and their ideas filled the popular press. The few authors we do know that Hitler admired were steeped in that culture. Those ideas are still with us today. Look at what happened to Terri Schiavo. It’s a good time for us to remind people of the social consequences of Darwinism as Weikart so well documents. It’s bad enough to teach flawed theories in a classroom, but it gets downright dangerous when we let such theories lead us to a diminished view of human life and dignity. This commentary first aired on April 7, 2005.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial
KEYWORDS: cnim; darwin; evolution; hitler
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-47 next last
Philosophies have consequences. Think out where yours will lead.
1 posted on 08/30/2005 6:57:21 AM PDT by Rhadaghast
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Rhadaghast

I guess Patrick Henry will not send this out. Thanks.


2 posted on 08/30/2005 6:59:45 AM PDT by kinsman redeemer (the real enemy seeks to devour what is good)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rhadaghast

This should be an entertaining thread. Just going to sit back and enjoy.


3 posted on 08/30/2005 7:00:20 AM PDT by mlc9852
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kinsman redeemer

Format Format Format


4 posted on 08/30/2005 7:00:54 AM PDT by stocksthatgoup (Polls = Proof that when the MSM want your opinion they will give it to you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: mlc9852

Thanks:
Entertaining, or get people to think?


5 posted on 08/30/2005 7:01:44 AM PDT by Rhadaghast (Yeshua haMashiach hu Adonai Tsidkenu)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: All
I apologize, I forgot to break this into paragraphs. Please feel free to read this at the Breakpoint sight.
6 posted on 08/30/2005 7:02:51 AM PDT by Rhadaghast (Yeshua haMashiach hu Adonai Tsidkenu)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Rhadaghast

A Matter of Life and Death From Darwin to Hitler

August 30, 2005

In all our contemporary conflicts over the teaching of evolution in schools, there’s one question that nobody asks: To what does the embrace of Darwinism lead?

Historian Richard Weikart explores that topic in a book called From Darwinto Hitler: Evolutionary Ethics, Eugenics, and Racism in Germany. Despite that provocative title, Weikart is no sensationalist. He’s not out to prove that Hitler and the Nazi party were directly inspired by Charles Darwin’s theories. But what Weikart does demonstrate, through exhaustive research, is that Darwin’s ideas about the origin of species helped create a culture that devalued human life. And in that culture, Nazism was able to thrive.

Darwin wasn’t the first person to claim that the strong and healthy have higher value than the weak and sick, or that some races are inferior to others. Those ideas, Weikart says, were around long before Darwin. What Darwin provided was a scientific foundation for these beliefs. Weikart writes, “Only in the late nineteenth and especially the early twentieth century did significant debate erupt over issues relating to the sanctity of human life. … It was no mere coincidence that these contentious issues emerged at the same time that Darwinism was gaining an influence. Darwinism played an important role in this debate, for it altered many people’s conceptions of the importance and value of human life, as well as the significance of death.” And it wasn’t just the sanctity of life that came under attack. Darwinism also strengthened what Weikart calls “scientific racism,” the theory that some races were less fully evolved than others.

Because of Darwin’s theories, leading scientists in the early part of the twentieth century felt emboldened to propose radical ideas about how the sick or members of other races should be treated. Even as we read them today, some of their statements still sound shocking in their willful ignorance. Several scientists, for example, compared the mentally ill to apes. Textbooks were written that allegedly demonstrated scientifically that Africans, Native Americans, and Australian aborigines were subhuman. The eugenics movement—advocated in America as well as Europe—was able to bring about the sterilization of thousands of supposedly “inferior” people.

In that environment, a young Adolf Hitler found fertile soil for his radical ideas for the “super race.” Weikart could not trace those ideas directly to Darwin, as we have little evidence of which authors Hitler read and admired. But in his days in Vienna and Munich, theories about racial inequality were everywhere. As Weikart says, “Eugenics and euthanasia … were embraced by a diverse crowd of secular social reformers,” and their ideas filled the popular press. The few authors we do know that Hitler admired were steeped in that culture.

Those ideas are still with us today. Look at what happened to Terri Schiavo. It’s a good time for us to remind people of the social consequences of Darwinism as Weikart so well documents. It’s bad enough to teach flawed theories in a classroom, but it gets downright dangerous when we let such theories lead us to a diminished view of human life and dignity.

This commentary first aired on April 7, 2005.

7 posted on 08/30/2005 7:03:25 AM PDT by newsgatherer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kinsman redeemer

who is "patrick henry" besides the revolutionary hero?


8 posted on 08/30/2005 7:04:01 AM PDT by Rhadaghast (Yeshua haMashiach hu Adonai Tsidkenu)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Rhadaghast
How is number seven? OK?

Jake

9 posted on 08/30/2005 7:04:13 AM PDT by newsgatherer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Rhadaghast

I haven't read this article yet. Let me point out though, that I am on the Intelligent Design side of the Darwin debate.

However, the folks on the evolution side on Free Republic have been fair and balanced in the discussions that I have ever shared with them. They are patriotic Americans who desire the best for their nation, their families, and themselves.

They should in no way be compared with Hitler. One of the debate rules that floats around FR every now and then is this: The first to compare the other side to Hitler or Nazism loses the argument.


10 posted on 08/30/2005 7:04:40 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: newsgatherer

I never really considered it, but given that Darwin postulates that superior creatures adapt from less superior ancestors, wouldn't more evolved races fit the Darwinian definition of a superior species?


11 posted on 08/30/2005 7:05:38 AM PDT by x5452
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: xzins
I am on the Intelligent Design side of the Darwin debate.

Ah, what does that mean exactly?

What do yu believe? Is a day in Genesis one a literal 24 hour day as a reading of Genesis one would appear?

12 posted on 08/30/2005 7:08:26 AM PDT by newsgatherer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: x5452

Hold on, I only reposted it with paragraph breaks, I'm not the author.


13 posted on 08/30/2005 7:09:39 AM PDT by newsgatherer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Rhadaghast

"To what does the embrace of Darwinism lead?"

Terri Schiavo


14 posted on 08/30/2005 7:10:30 AM PDT by drama queen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: newsgatherer; Alamo-Girl

Personally, I think the creation story is told from God's point of view. I also understand that a person on a spaceship traveling at the speed of light has time pass much more slowly than those who would be on the earth. A set location would experience time much differently than that which had been flung out to hurtle through space at tremendous speeds.

In short, a day from the viewpoint of God would be much different than the amount of time that passed on earth.


15 posted on 08/30/2005 7:12:55 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Rhadaghast

What a crock.

This is what is known as social Darwinism and is not apart of the scientific theory of evolution. See:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/darwin/nameof/


16 posted on 08/30/2005 7:13:12 AM PDT by RadioAstronomer (Senior member of Darwin Central)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rhadaghast

“Only in the late nineteenth and especially the early twentieth century did significant debate erupt over issues relating to the sanctity of human life. …>>>>>>>>>

Yes, and prior to this human life was considered totally inconsequential by most of the world, that is why there was no significant debate. The whole premise of this argument is absurd.


17 posted on 08/30/2005 7:13:51 AM PDT by RipSawyer (Acceptance of irrational thinking is expanding exponentiallly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: drama queen
Terri Schiavo

The theory of evolution leads up to Terri Schiavo?

Codswallop. You are living up to your screen name.

18 posted on 08/30/2005 7:15:10 AM PDT by RadioAstronomer (Senior member of Darwin Central)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: newsgatherer

How would you measure a day before the sun, earth and our whole universe was completed? A day is only relevant on earth.


19 posted on 08/30/2005 7:16:22 AM PDT by Nathan Zachary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: xzins

Godwin's Law, originated on Usenet.

The fact that people have at times used whatever justification they could find for their perverse and evil machinations does not mean that what they hijacked is itself the cause of their evil.
That is just as dishonest an argument as those that use God to justify their violence.

Additionally, the notion that some people are better than others has been around for millenia. Hitler didn't need Darwin. All he needed was man's fallen nature and selfishness.


20 posted on 08/30/2005 7:17:32 AM PDT by visualops (www.visualops.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-47 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson