Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

We’ve been reading Charles Darwin all wrong
America magazine ^ | 17 February 2022 | Christopher Sandford

Posted on 03/09/2022 1:32:17 AM PST by Cronos

Was Charles Darwin a Darwinist?

...“With savages,” Darwin

the weak in body or mind are soon eliminated. We civilised men, on the other hand, do our utmost to check the process of elimination. We build asylums for the imbecile, the maimed, and the sick; we institute poor-laws; and our medical men exert their utmost skill to save the life of every one to the last moment. There is reason to believe that vaccination has preserved thousands, who from a weak constitution would formerly have succumbed to small-pox. Thus the weak members of civilised societies propagate their kind. No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man. It is surprising how soon a want of care, or care wrongly directed, leads to the degeneration of a domestic race; but excepting in the case of man himself, hardly any one is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed. The aid we feel impelled to give to the helpless is mainly an incidental result of the instinct of sympathy.

...Here is Hitler, for instance, speaking at Nuremberg in 1933: “The gulf between the lowest creature which can still be styled man and our highest races is greater than that between the lowest type of man and the highest ape.”

...Charles Darwin himself would almost certainly not have endorsed the views of many of his spiritual heirs today that the biblical story of creation and the evolution of the physical universe are mutually exclusive rather than twin manifestations of a divine act of self-revelation. It is a fallacy that never fails to strike me when I come to attend services in the nave of Westminster Abbey, just a few feet away from where Darwin lies buried.

(Excerpt) Read more at americamagazine.org ...


TOPICS: General Discusssion
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-27 next last
The article is much more detailed. Please read it before commenting on the title 😁
1 posted on 03/09/2022 1:32:17 AM PST by Cronos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Cronos

I am aware of Darwin’s deathbed conversion.

I don’t think he’s been misinterpreted at all, but I don’t think his intent was what liberals use his work for.

However, evolutionists simply took his conclusions under an unaccountae value system by extremely rational men who rightly concluded that, in a godless universe, that it was their obligation to bring man to his most developed point.


2 posted on 03/09/2022 1:39:13 AM PST by Jonty30 ( I am an extremely responsible person. When something goes wrong, my boss asks if I was responsible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jonty30

liberals point to evolution, and darwin, while also going ape crazy when species go extinct because they were not fit.

It’s a mental disorder.


3 posted on 03/09/2022 1:51:40 AM PST by SPDSHDW (You get what you let occur with no resistance. Everything Joepedo n' felons do is on your head.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Cronos

His argument here is much like that used by at least some of the eugenicists.
That modernity has broken natural selection by allowing the unfit to breed.


4 posted on 03/09/2022 1:54:39 AM PST by buwaya
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cronos

I read the whole article.

‘See there’s a statue to Darwin that needs tearing down?

j/k


5 posted on 03/09/2022 2:00:43 AM PST by Does so (Americans had no desire for war between 1939 and 1941. Rheinland? Sometimes War Finds YOU!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cronos

Social Darwinism needs more mention here.


6 posted on 03/09/2022 2:12:13 AM PST by Scram1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: buwaya

The definition of “fitness” was amended because it was clear with humans that anyone could breed; producing “viable offspring” was modified to producing “viable grandchildren” because it was understood there was nothing viable about breeding children who would die in urban violence, police encounters, and drug ODs.


7 posted on 03/09/2022 2:28:52 AM PST by kearnyirish2 (Affirmative action is economic warfare against white males (and therefore white families).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Cronos

The Nazis’ use of social Darwinism is a good example of bad science. Darwin never said that the strongest survive, only those that are most able to adapt. The Nazis got a lot of things wrong because they had weird ideas.


8 posted on 03/09/2022 2:31:41 AM PST by Telepathic Intruder (Democracy is two dead Democrats and a Republican voting who's brains are for dinner.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Scram1

Social Darwinists invariably believe that they are the highest form of evolved man, and that they have the right to decide who must be eliminated, not by smallpox, poverty, or natural disasters, but by deliberate policies instituted by them. Darwin would probably have disowned them.


9 posted on 03/09/2022 3:11:57 AM PST by Eleutheria5 (January 6, worst assault on democracy since the Reichstag Fire)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: kearnyirish2

For all the noise generated by all those forms of death, they amount to a very small portion of the population. Its really a very low rate of casualties from violence. I doubt that has a discernable effect on survival and subsequent breeding.


10 posted on 03/09/2022 3:17:49 AM PST by buwaya
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Cronos

I’ll gladly read Darwin (again), but not this article.

The presumptuous headline alone is enough reason not to.


11 posted on 03/09/2022 3:18:02 AM PST by enumerated
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SPDSHDW
liberals point to evolution, and darwin, while also going ape crazy when species go extinct because they were not fit.

Yup, they worry about losing one and climate change destroying life on this planet, and yet fail to acknowledge that life would evolve and adapt to the new conditions to replace that which is lost.

12 posted on 03/09/2022 3:38:54 AM PST by metmom (...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of our faith…)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Cronos

‘No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man. ‘

He’s comparing apples to oranges and is entirely unaware of it. Men are made in the image of God and have an immortal soul. Their value and usefulness to society aren’t degraded by physical infirmity. Animals have a function in nature and are a resource. That’s about it.


13 posted on 03/09/2022 3:49:45 AM PST by TalBlack (We have a Christian duty and a patriotic duty. God help us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: buwaya

The Bell Curve book says the government is paying the unfit to reproduce. LBJ and the Great Society. Destruction of the inner city. Rat sinks of Democrat voter base.


14 posted on 03/09/2022 4:01:11 AM PST by Trumpet 1 (US Constitution is my guide.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Cronos

It’s how I view democrats. /spit


15 posted on 03/09/2022 4:04:43 AM PST by Flavious_Maximus (Fauci is a murderer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Scram1

Is it the pussification of America of which you speak?


16 posted on 03/09/2022 4:26:07 AM PST by MrRelevant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SPDSHDW

Darwin, Freud, etc... All a bunch of racist colonialist pseudo-scientists of the day who transformed medicine into the dictat of Covid we see today.

Darwin like Freud was ideological, perverting science to a level of religion.

Science should never be used to meddle in people’s lives, but to create thought.


17 posted on 03/09/2022 4:49:25 AM PST by JudgemAll (Democrats Fed. job-security in hates:hypocrites must be gay like us or be tested/crucified)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Cronos

An interesting read


18 posted on 03/09/2022 5:14:37 AM PST by Nifster (I’m see puppy dogs in the clouds)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jonty30
What's fascinating to me is that in Darwin's On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life (yes, Christian conservatives are right to argue there's a reason leftists in education don't want us to know the full title of his most famous book), Darwin himself mentions the Cambrian Explosion as a problem his natural selection doesn't account for. Basically, about 500 million years ago that was a brief period of about 1 million years (some say closer to 5 million years) in which 50% to 80% of all known phyla all of a sudden sprang into existence in the archaeological record.

That flies into the face of a natural selection belief that expects a gradual speciation across billions of years, not just a million years (making the math off by a factor of a thousand). It was already known a century and a half ago (Darwin's day) and Darwin knew about it. In his book he says that eventually archaeology will improve, find more evidence further back in time that the phyla had originated long before what was thought in Darwin's day, and prove his belief in natural selection correct. He even says that if it's not the case, if that the archaeological record shows the Cambrian Explosion to be even more profound that was believed in his time, then we should shelve his idea as one that's probably not correct. He called it a "manifest objection to my theory".

The Cambrian Explosion is more profound that thought a century and a half ago. Darwin's own book says to ditch his idea of natural selection now that we have more knowledge from the 150 years of archeological discoveries.

19 posted on 03/09/2022 5:41:05 AM PST by Tell It Right (1st Thessalonians 5:21 -- Put everything to the test, hold fast to that which is true.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: buwaya

—> That modernity has broken natural selection by allowing the unfit to breed.

Like attorneys!

What’s up with that??!


20 posted on 03/09/2022 6:06:05 AM PST by aMorePerfectUnion (Fraud vitiates everything.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-27 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
Religion
Topics · Post Article

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