Social Darwinism
david581c
Posts: 337 Member
somewhat lurker, first time poster maker.
do you believe in it?
in universal terms: survival of the fittest
Personally, I'm all for it, even if I don't make the cut, I'm for it.
do you believe in it?
in universal terms: survival of the fittest
Personally, I'm all for it, even if I don't make the cut, I'm for it.
0
Replies
-
What do you mean, like not feeling bad about the world's eejits killing themselves by stupidity?
Like perfectly 'sane' (and by this I mean not people with learning disabilities or whatever) climbing mountains in the middle of winter wearing only shorts and tee shirts, then dying of hypothermia? Surely, that must benefit the human race as a whole...0 -
I've never been opposed to people too dumb to survive removing themselves from the gene pool. And I'm not alone. There's a whole series of books called the Darwin Awards honoring the spectacularly stupid ways people end up killing themselves. A little cruel and morbid? Certainly. But you REALLY shouldn't get blinding drunk and decide to fly a plane. Especially if you don't know how to fly in the first place. I just can't bring myself to feel bad for people that mind blowingly stupid.
http://darwinawards.com/darwin/darwin2008-23.html0 -
Ok, so what happens when it gets to the extreme?
At the extreme end of Social Darwinism you wind up with Crony Capitalism, which is just another word for (economic) Aristrocracy. If the "Most fit" use their genius and their power and their accumulated wealth to buy politicians and policies that suit them in able to acquire more power and wealth in a never ending cycle that puts more resources to fewer people, you end up with Somalia, or Louis XIV's France, or Di-ckens' Britain.
And the pendulum swings (again).0 -
Survival of the fittest is fine when talking about the animal kingdom, but with human beings it's too complicated of an area, especially with the advent of more technology and stronger social structures. For instance, physical strength and speed are rarely a determining factor in the civilized world for survival. Intelligence should be. But because of welfare systems people who are not as "fit" as more productive citiens will not only live, but procreate as well (probably multiple times).
The problem is, people think this hasn't been happening all along in one way or another. For many, many, many generations, over the course of thousands of years, I could make the case that the "fit" were actually the ones who died. They were the risk takers, the warriors, the explorers. There is a reason the mankind has not evolved into geniuses and supreme athletes, because the average person will only take the average risks in their life time. The superior will dwindle their own numbers in warfare and risk. At least that is how it used to be.
So our society is no different than any others in the past, we have the same percentages of idiots to geniuses that any other has had, just for different reasons.0 -
I hate the term Social Darwinism. It could mean a variety of things to a variety of people.0
-
This has been tried before. Henry Ford was a fan, as was Hitler.
Under a strict system of Social Darwinism, (aka "Eugenics") the 'less fit' are not allowed to survive if they are unable to provide for themselves. Do we really want to let the handicapped starve? Shall we allow Jerry's kids to rot in their wheelchairs? (never mind, no wheelchairs, no need for them).
It's been tried, it's unconscionably cruel and inhuman and we don't do it.
So how about forced sterilization? Bad genetics? We can't have you passing that on. So - shall we give 8 year old boys vasectomys, or just neuter them like dogs? If we go ahead and "nut 'em" they won't be wasting our more fit daughters' time now will they?
Those waters get deep real quick.0 -
This has been tried before. Henry Ford was a fan, as was Hitler.
Under a strict system of Social Darwinism, (aka "Eugenics") the 'less fit' are not allowed to survive if they are unable to provide for themselves. Do we really want to let the handicapped starve? Shall we allow Jerry's kids to rot in their wheelchairs? (never mind, no wheelchairs, no need for them).
It's been tried, it's unconscionably cruel and inhuman and we don't do it.
So how about forced sterilization? Bad genetics? We can't have you passing that on. So - shall we give 8 year old boys vasectomys, or just neuter them like dogs? If we go ahead and "nut 'em" they won't be wasting our more fit daughters' time now will they?
Those waters get deep real quick.
I would just like to state here that Darwin actually rejected this idea, for anyone interested.0 -
This has been tried before. Henry Ford was a fan, as was Hitler.
Under a strict system of Social Darwinism, (aka "Eugenics") the 'less fit' are not allowed to survive if they are unable to provide for themselves. Do we really want to let the handicapped starve? Shall we allow Jerry's kids to rot in their wheelchairs? (never mind, no wheelchairs, no need for them).
It's been tried, it's unconscionably cruel and inhuman and we don't do it.
So how about forced sterilization? Bad genetics? We can't have you passing that on. So - shall we give 8 year old boys vasectomys, or just neuter them like dogs? If we go ahead and "nut 'em" they won't be wasting our more fit daughters' time now will they?
Those waters get deep real quick.
Besides, it's looking like soon, bad genetics will be a thing of the past anyways due to scientific advances. Who knows what gene therapy will be able to accomplish in the next few generations?0 -
Anybody seen the movie "Gattaca"? :huh:0
-
Anybody seen the movie "Gattaca"? :huh:
If I did, I don't remember. But I think it will be interesting to see what happens as science makes it possible for wealthier people to genetically engineer their children. Think about what that will do to conversations like these, or racism and class in general. Once you have the abilities to not only wipe away all disabling genetic mutations, but can actually pick height, structure, strength, speed and intelligence, how will us commoners feel?0 -
Have you seen the film Idiocracy? Kind of a silly movie, but the social commentary is pretty spot on.The problem is, people think this hasn't been happening all along in one way or another. For many, many, many generations, over the course of thousands of years, I could make the case that the "fit" were actually the ones who died. They were the risk takers, the warriors, the explorers. There is a reason the mankind has not evolved into geniuses and supreme athletes, because the average person will only take the average risks in their life time. The superior will dwindle their own numbers in warfare and risk. At least that is how it used to be.
So our society is no different than any others in the past, we have the same percentages of idiots to geniuses that any other has had, just for different reasons.0 -
Ya, I was thinking the same thing. The first 5 minutes of that movie is spooky,,,
Google the video, all you need is the first 5 minutes. "Idiocracy", by Matt Drudge (the Beavis & Butthead / King of the Hill guy).0 -
To me, this is a frightening idea. If you take this theory and apply it to, say, economics or morality, the result tends to be some version of a rather ruthless tendency to favor the “strong” or “might makes right” approach. Compassion, mercy, forgiveness, etc., are all weaknesses. Concern for the poor is also a weakness. The consequences of social Darwinism for morality are obviously catastrophic.
"Idiocracy" was entertaining!0 -
"Idiocracy" was delighfully entertaining :-)0
-
Have you seen the film Idiocracy? Kind of a silly movie, but the social commentary is pretty spot on.The problem is, people think this hasn't been happening all along in one way or another. For many, many, many generations, over the course of thousands of years, I could make the case that the "fit" were actually the ones who died. They were the risk takers, the warriors, the explorers. There is a reason the mankind has not evolved into geniuses and supreme athletes, because the average person will only take the average risks in their life time. The superior will dwindle their own numbers in warfare and risk. At least that is how it used to be.
So our society is no different than any others in the past, we have the same percentages of idiots to geniuses that any other has had, just for different reasons.
That's a great movie.0
This discussion has been closed.