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, theres 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. Hes not out to prove that Hitler and the Nazi party were directly inspired by Charles Darwins theories. But what Weikart does demonstrate, through exhaustive research, is that Darwins ideas about the origin of species helped create a culture that devalued human life. And in that culture, Nazism was able to thrive. Darwin wasnt 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 peoples conceptions of the importance and value of human life, as well as the significance of death. And it wasnt 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 Darwins 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 movementadvocated in America as well as Europewas 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. Its a good time for us to remind people of the social consequences of Darwinism as Weikart so well documents. Its 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.
I guess Patrick Henry will not send this out. Thanks.
This should be an entertaining thread. Just going to sit back and enjoy.
Format Format Format
Thanks:
Entertaining, or get people to think?
August 30, 2005
In all our contemporary conflicts over the teaching of evolution in schools, theres 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. Hes not out to prove that Hitler and the Nazi party were directly inspired by Charles Darwins theories. But what Weikart does demonstrate, through exhaustive research, is that Darwins ideas about the origin of species helped create a culture that devalued human life. And in that culture, Nazism was able to thrive.
Darwin wasnt 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 peoples conceptions of the importance and value of human life, as well as the significance of death. And it wasnt 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 Darwins 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 movementadvocated in America as well as Europewas 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. Its a good time for us to remind people of the social consequences of Darwinism as Weikart so well documents. Its 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.
who is "patrick henry" besides the revolutionary hero?
Jake
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.
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?
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?
Hold on, I only reposted it with paragraph breaks, I'm not the author.
"To what does the embrace of Darwinism lead?"
Terri Schiavo
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.
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/
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.
The theory of evolution leads up to Terri Schiavo?
Codswallop. You are living up to your screen name.
How would you measure a day before the sun, earth and our whole universe was completed? A day is only relevant on earth.
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.
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.