Darwin and Marx: Materialism

PoliticalChic

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Oct 6, 2008
124,860
60,193
2,300
Brooklyn, NY
1. Every Leftist is, essentially, a Marxist…even though most eschew the title since the fall of the Soviet Union. Even so, Left-wing ideas are predicated on Marx’s materialist view. Philosophically, the term implies that only material things are real. Therefore, emotions, such as love, are no more than chemistry. And it suggests that it is only genes and environment that determine our actions, and free will plays no role. And, of course, God and religious beliefs are nonsense.
Prager, “Still The Best Hope.”

2. From Marx on, the Left has fought against religion for the above reason, and because they understood how difficult it is to get religious people to engage in revolution for the purpose of bettering their material lives. Such folks often relegate the material world to lower priority than the spiritual, moral and intellectual world. Ibid.

a. “ The theory of evolution is simply materialist philosophy applied to nature, ….Darwin was described by Leon Trotsky as "the highest triumph of the dialectic in the whole field of organic matter."
Alan Woods, Ted Grant. "Marxism and Darwinism,Reason in Revolt: Marxism and Modern Science.”




3. While there were theories of evolution before Darwin’s, earlier versions presumed God or a Mind with a design or purpose. Darwin’s view aligned with Marxist economic thesis, in that 'matter,' rather than mind, is the driving force. For Darwin, life is empty of any purpose other than the primary directive of nature, reproduction: the survival of the species.





4. The crux of the evolutionary controversy, in simplest terms, is: did mind create matter, or did matter create mind? According to a theistic worldview, mind is primary; it is the fundamental creative force in the universe, whether God created the world quickly by fiat, or slowly by an evolutionary process. According to Darwin, it is the reverse: matter is the primary creative force, and mind emerged only very late in evolutionary history.
Conklin, “When All the Gods Trembled: Darwinism, Scopes, and American Intellectuals,” p. 42.

5. To be more precise, mind does not exist at all. Only the brain exists. And thoughts are merely the byproducts of neurons firing in the brain, and based on the need for survival.

a. “Darwin applied a consistent philosophy of materialism to his interpretation of nature. Matter is the ground of all existence; mind, spirit, and God as well, are just words that express the wondrous results of neuronal complexity."
Stephen Jay Gould, "Ever Since Darwin: Reflections in Natural History," pg. 12–13

6. Again: by accepting the materialist Darwinian explanation for human beings, one must believe that “mind, spirit, and God” are merely concepts that appear in the in the human mind when the electrical circuitry of the brain has evolved to a certain level of complexity.




7. Which commands the following question: if those ideas are merely ‘the results of neural complexity,’ then doesn’t the same apply to all ideas…including the idea of materialism itself? And, therefore…if “mind, spirit, and God” are concepts that deserve no credence….why should the ideas of Marx, Darwin, and materialism itself earn any?
Nancy Pearcey, “Saving Leonardo,” chapter six.
 
From Marx's "Communist Manifesto":
"To achieve the Socialist Dictatorship of the Proletariat, three things would have to be accomplished:

1. Elimination of all Property Rights.
2. Dissolution of the Family Unit.
3. Destruction of Religion."
Looks like the Progressive Liberals are doing a good job so far! :D
 
I think Obama likes Rawls more than Marx personally

What a darn good point!

Rawls wrote that social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that (Rawls, "A Theory of Justice," 1971, p.303): they are to be of the greatest benefit to the least-advantaged members of society (the difference principle).

Of course, this means a different distribution of income and wealth than that produced by a free market...i.e., an Obama re-election.

This is based on a Rawls presumption that this principle is one which most people would choose. Two considerations: first, this would require far more redistributive taxation in order to equalize income and wealth, and, second, it would not maximize total production, income and wealth within the society, and, ultimately, would wind up hurting the poorest.

Once upon a time I believed that Americans would eschew this collectivist view....

...seems that 60 million voters bought it.
 
Rawls:

You'll never find, as long as you live
Someone who loves you like Obama do
You'll never find, no matter where you search
Someone who cares about your vote the way he do

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nuVUcQaau_s]LOU RAWLS LIVE - YOU'LL NEVER FIND ANOTHER LOVE LIKE MINE - YouTube[/ame]
 
1. Every Leftist is, essentially, a Marxist…even though most eschew the title since the fall of the Soviet Union. Even so, Left-wing ideas are predicated on Marx’s materialist view. Philosophically, the term implies that only material things are real. Therefore, emotions, such as love, are no more than chemistry. And it suggests that it is only genes and environment that determine our actions, and free will plays no role. And, of course, God and religious beliefs are nonsense.
Prager, “Still The Best Hope.”

2. From Marx on, the Left has fought against religion for the above reason, and because they understood how difficult it is to get religious people to engage in revolution for the purpose of bettering their material lives. Such folks often relegate the material world to lower priority than the spiritual, moral and intellectual world. Ibid.

a. “ The theory of evolution is simply materialist philosophy applied to nature, ….Darwin was described by Leon Trotsky as "the highest triumph of the dialectic in the whole field of organic matter."
Alan Woods, Ted Grant. "Marxism and Darwinism,Reason in Revolt: Marxism and Modern Science.”




3. While there were theories of evolution before Darwin’s, earlier versions presumed God or a Mind with a design or purpose. Darwin’s view aligned with Marxist economic thesis, in that 'matter,' rather than mind, is the driving force. For Darwin, life is empty of any purpose other than the primary directive of nature, reproduction: the survival of the species.





4. The crux of the evolutionary controversy, in simplest terms, is: did mind create matter, or did matter create mind? According to a theistic worldview, mind is primary; it is the fundamental creative force in the universe, whether God created the world quickly by fiat, or slowly by an evolutionary process. According to Darwin, it is the reverse: matter is the primary creative force, and mind emerged only very late in evolutionary history.
Conklin, “When All the Gods Trembled: Darwinism, Scopes, and American Intellectuals,” p. 42.

5. To be more precise, mind does not exist at all. Only the brain exists. And thoughts are merely the byproducts of neurons firing in the brain, and based on the need for survival.

a. “Darwin applied a consistent philosophy of materialism to his interpretation of nature. Matter is the ground of all existence; mind, spirit, and God as well, are just words that express the wondrous results of neuronal complexity."
Stephen Jay Gould, "Ever Since Darwin: Reflections in Natural History," pg. 12–13

6. Again: by accepting the materialist Darwinian explanation for human beings, one must believe that “mind, spirit, and God” are merely concepts that appear in the in the human mind when the electrical circuitry of the brain has evolved to a certain level of complexity.




7. Which commands the following question: if those ideas are merely ‘the results of neural complexity,’ then doesn’t the same apply to all ideas…including the idea of materialism itself? And, therefore…if “mind, spirit, and God” are concepts that deserve no credence….why should the ideas of Marx, Darwin, and materialism itself earn any?
Nancy Pearcey, “Saving Leonardo,” chapter six.

I was brought up as an athetist but I brought my children up as christians. I agree with most of the above quote but I consider the theist viewpoint as the more rewarding way to direct your life, as well as the more natural way.

it is hard not to question when you see ants working together, or dogs as part of the family who understand emotion but not technology. are humans the top of the ladder? it seems implausible but I have no proof.
 
Come on people, you gotta admit, right wingers talking about "materialism" and then trying to put a man into office who said he won't represent half the country because they are too poor, people who shout "let him die" and says "feed the poor and they will breed", is hilarious. Even Fox says the Republican Party is the "party of millionaires".
 
LOL. So, in the name of extreme rightwing politics, let's just discard the most robust scientific theory that we have.

The legions of willfull ignorance are once again in full charge, the hounds of deciet in full bay.
 
Instead of guessing what Marxism is, PC, why not educate yourself?


Hey! I have an idea!

How about I ask folks in Eastern Europe!



But...you're not gonna hide behind the old saw 'they never really, really tried real true Marxism,' are you?
You should have realized that I don't 'guess' about the subjects about which I post.



See if you can learn from the following:

“Just for fun, find a Marxist professor- who scoffs at the idea that people work less if they lose the incentive of money- how he would feel if his name were not put on the academic articles he published. Instead the articles would be published under the name of another academic who needed the recognition more than he did. After all…he would still have the satisfaction of having written the articles….

His completely reasonable response would be that he earned’ the right to have his name on those articles, and denying him that measure of earned success is viciously unfair. Exactly.”
Arthur Brooks, “The Road to Freedom,” p. 26.
 
LOL. So, in the name of extreme rightwing politics, let's just discard the most robust scientific theory that we have.

The legions of willfull ignorance are once again in full charge, the hounds of deciet in full bay.

That bloviation is certainly not any form of response to what I wrote....is it.
 
Come on people, you gotta admit, right wingers talking about "materialism" and then trying to put a man into office who said he won't represent half the country because they are too poor, people who shout "let him die" and says "feed the poor and they will breed", is hilarious. Even Fox says the Republican Party is the "party of millionaires".

See.....now you just teased me into posting a thread about Obama....and it's gonna be your fault.
 
Marxism can be summed up in one phrase.

The elimination of private property.

"OCCUPY WALL STREET GENIUS SAYS HE’S AGAINST “PRIVATE” PROPERTY, NOT “PERSONAL” PROPERTY
By: jmattera
11/17/2011 10:01 AM


And that’s because he wants to keep his iPad 2, naturally, and not share it with the shiftless vagrants fighting over access to one of the three Porta-Potties recently delivered to the now-evacuated camp site in lower Manhattan.

As Samantha Bee from The Daily Show reports, there’s an income “class” that has sprung up at Zuccotti Park: Those sporting the capitalist creations called Apple products as they set up their temporary latte corners, and those annoyingly banging on drum sets all day.

The thing is that the dude musing about the differences between “personal” and “private” property isn’t even the biggest WTF moment of what you’re about to see...."
Occupy Wall Street Genius Says He's Against "Private" Property, Not "Personal" Property | Conservative News, Views & Books
 
Marxism can be summed up in one phrase.

The elimination of private property.

"OCCUPY WALL STREET GENIUS SAYS HE’S AGAINST “PRIVATE” PROPERTY, NOT “PERSONAL” PROPERTY
By: jmattera
11/17/2011 10:01 AM


And that’s because he wants to keep his iPad 2, naturally, and not share it with the shiftless vagrants fighting over access to one of the three Porta-Potties recently delivered to the now-evacuated camp site in lower Manhattan.

As Samantha Bee from The Daily Show reports, there’s an income “class” that has sprung up at Zuccotti Park: Those sporting the capitalist creations called Apple products as they set up their temporary latte corners, and those annoyingly banging on drum sets all day.

The thing is that the dude musing about the differences between “personal” and “private” property isn’t even the biggest WTF moment of what you’re about to see...."
Occupy Wall Street Genius Says He's Against "Private" Property, Not "Personal" Property | Conservative News, Views & Books

We've gone from discussing the influence of Marx and Darwin to being told to pay attention to what one anonymous guy thinks? Your message is all over the place, cherry-picking items and pretending they're somehow indicative of what "we" think. In reality it's just rhetorical bullshit, that doesn't stand the logic test, i.e.Fallacy of Composition, assuming that something true of part of a whole must also be true of the whole.

Fallacy of composition - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Well let's blame the mordern day leftists for all the ills of society. Surely all God followers and right wingers have done nothing bad for this nation.

Now use that God given , christain belief to insult, flame and name call.
 
Well let's blame the mordern day leftists for all the ills of society. Surely all God followers and right wingers have done nothing bad for this nation.

Now use that God given , christain belief to insult, flame and name call.

Even the exhortation to keep things on a biblical basis is misleading, because there's often no one biblical stand on most issues. Biblical marriage, for example, is usually assumed to be a man and a woman, when it actuality it could be a man and several women.

My Take: The danger of calling behavior
 
The Red Scare, thread 20,451 in her series of hate and fear. Written by PoliticalChic with the research assistance of Mr. Winston Smith and his staff at the Ministry of Truth; funded by the Coal and Heavy Metals Industry, the Oil and Gas Cartel and a proud sponsor of the Tom Delay truth in advertising coalition.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top