Re: Racism is Racism: Evolution is NOT

Brian D Harper (harper.10@osu.edu)
Fri, 23 May 1997 14:22:42 -0400

At 11:51 PM 5/23/97 +1000, Peter wrote:
>At 00:23 23/05/97 -0600, Russell wrote:
>>>In the sense
>>>that Darwinism as a worldview may prove racism *irrational* but cannot
>>>prove it *immoral*, Darwinism fosters racism.
>>
>>RS:Modern particle physics cannot prove murder immoral. Does that mean
>>that my field of study fosters murder?
>
>PG:Since I'm not a Hiroshima survivor, I suppose I would be more inclined to
>say no. :-) But Darwinism has much more to say about both killing, and who
>or what we are than does partical physics.

For some reason there is a fundamental point that is not being
communicated. Darwinism the world view may say something about morality
and killing but Darwin's scientific theory has nothing to say
about such things. The second law of thermodynamics has some things
to say about order and disorder in certain situations. Shall we
find support from thermodynamics for terrorism or for Charlie Manson's
helter skelter?

>I can go and kill a frail old
>lady and at best Darwin has nothing to say to me, at worst he says,
>"Ahhh... I see you are engaged in the struggle for survival of the fittest!
> Good luck, you're off to a good start!"
>

the science of evolution. Even given the absurdity of trying to
base one's moral decisions upon science, you've got the above completely
wrong. Killing the old woman doesn't matter since she's past her child
bearing age. You have to kill her children and her children's children.
Or perhaps just sterilize them and use them as slave labor.

>Now clearly no sane evolutionist would support the murder, because even
>evolutionists have an innate sense of morality :-) But I am interested in
>the logical extensions of the theory. If evolution of homo sapiens is the
>goal,

it isn't

>the means is the death of the weaker ones (I've left behind the issue
>of race btw). Killing worked for our animal ancestors, did it not? Nature
>rent in tooth and claw?

been reading too much Dawkins. Cooperation plays as much a role
in evolution as does competition.

>I wonder, at what point in the evolutionary scheme
>of things, did it suddenly become immoral to kill others of the same
>species? The moral majority have slowed humanity's evolution to a snail's
>pace!
>

can you spell de-evolution :)

>All I can say is that I've yet to hear anyone demonstrate from the
>evolutionary worldview why killing fellow humans is wrong. I would go
>further - I would say the theory implies benefit in doing so.
>

It implies no such thing. Learn what it is before attacking it.

>I'm speaking only of *naturalistic* evolution, determinism.
>

Brian Harper
Associate Professor
Applied Mechanics
The Ohio State University

"God forbid that we should give out a dream of
our own imagination for a pattern of the world"
-- Francis Bacon