The ugliness and ineffectuality of "social darwinism"

Discussion in 'Religion and Ethics' started by Questioner, Jan 25, 2020.

  1. Questioner
    Offline

    Questioner Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2019
    Messages:
    1,584
    Thanks Received:
    77
    Trophy Points:
    50
    Ratings:
    +552
    So much could be said about the ugliness, archaism, and evolutionary inferiority of so-called "social Darwinism", "survival of the fittest", or whatnot, that it's not worth a superior man or woman's time to begin with.

    In reality, calling hidieous, defective little aberrations of ideas like that "original" to begin with would be a gross understatement; such simplistic little tyrannical ideas have been floated by inferior and defective little minds as far back as that simplistic little putz Machiavelli, something of a "sky daddy" to superstitious ugly people (along with his plagiarist, the culturally appropriating grubby little Jew known as Saul Alinsky), or other idiots and impotent weaklings as unoriginal and far back as Thrasmaychus in Plato's Republic, so idiotic and easily defeated as he was by the superior, Plato, of course.

    The reality, at least in any 1st world country comprised of intellectual and aesthetically inclined men and women (ugly and otherwise worthless and defective, whether intellectually, morally, emotionally, etc specimens excepted), having no rights any more than a beast or feral dog, by the virtue of their own inherent inferiority, ugliness, freakishness, and worthlessness, as well as the worthless and archaic little business, media, or advertisement models predicated on the ugliness in question, not something that a superior business man or woman like Ray Dalio would ever bother to taint himself with.

    In every 1st world country, other than perhaps the most impoverished, uneducated, and otherwise desperate and irrelevant members of society; the type to whom the aetheistic, animalistic, and heathen practices of rape, murder, incest, and addictions of many varieties, porn being on of them - very little, if anything in the way of our wants, needs, and drives is actually about "survival", such as is the mindset of 3rd world countries and those barely if at all evolved up from such an archaic, outdated, and reactionary means and way of hardscrabble and bestial existence.

    As an example, all of one's basic material needs could be very well provided in a homeless shelter, or in government sanctioned housing much as very few, if any people in 1st world countries live in "absolute poverty", or want of said basic material needs; but very few if any would voluntarily desire to live in such as situation if otherwise avoided.

    To the contrary, the vast majority of our drives and impetuses in 1st world countries are "higher mental wants", whether something as banal as television or media addiction, video gaming, social media, education (higher, or lower), hobbies or personal investments, such as acquiring more money to spend on 1st world luxuries such as cars, better family living conditions, food, clothing, better housing, vacations or outings, with most of our conflicts not being physical, violent, or bloody, but rather religious, political, ideological, and so forth.

    Contrary to the archaic, dated and primtive beliefs of the intellectually useless, worthless, and other devolved specimins and primates, the ugly mentality of "social Darwinism" and the handful of freaks, rapists, "incels", decrepit and miserly old codgers, and otherwise irrelevant and ineffectual trash and offal who give it more than a quick gaze and laugh, along with whatever other simplistic little archaic, ineffective calculations, simple faith-based easily repeated and bastardized axioms, via simple anti-intellectual confirmation bias, coupled with our inborn negative bias as documented by everyone from evolutionary psychologist to professional martial artists, being otherwise nothing but irrelvent, ugly calcuations and "blah blah blah" which would make a woman of the more aesthetically inclined variety shrivel her vagina up if it was being done for more than 1 ugly second at a time.

    Contrary, from every serious 1st world cultural perspective, such thing, of course is not "evolution" at all, nor is there anything "fit" about it, except perhaps what a sub 90-IQ meth addict or gang member might need to "survive" a conflict in a back alley, rather, as per the authors of our Common Law system of state government, such as Holmes, "chivalry" - not in some archaic feuding or dueling sense romanticized about during the medieval times supposedly engaged in by that minority of chosen few knights, rather than peasants or ordinary folk of the era - culture, civilization, as in our modern legal system(s) of law, order, checks, balances, legislation, courts, and whatnot is culturally, an evolution up from more primitive, archaic, and morally, intellectually, and aesthetically degenerate systems, such as the blood feuds, and other stereotypically "hillbilly" or "redneck" types of behaviors, which those whom Freud deemed maladapted to civilization might otherwise engage in if not for fear of the law, due to a lack or want of any geninue morality or moral or legal philosophical studies of their own, as is typically expected of the less moral members of society anyway, not inclined or even presupposed to have the same level of enlightened morality and self-sacrifice as that of a Judge, Officer, or Lawyer, dedicating their life to the study and pursuit of said things, rather than simply demonstrating the bare minimum of grudging "civilization" required to not be arrested or put in prison for rape, murder, or other bestial things.

    Only one evolutionarily defective, archaic, worthless not to imagine any remotely creative, moral, intellectual, or even aesthetic solution to modern problems, requiring the higher faculties of reason, humanism, intellectualism, self-restraint, scientific or philosophical inquisitiveness (and often a high IQ or EQ to match it), would be old, borning, ugly, defective, or otherwise worthless and inferior enough to resort to archaic, 3rd world "values" like that of so-called "social Darwinism".

    Even Hitler, was likely a plagiarist himself, having not come up with any worldview that hadn't previously existed such as in the case or more ancient tyrants and warlords like Ghenghis Khan. Along with ugliness and addictive perversion of view such a thing as a "game", as in a more evolved, organized sport, game or contest of mind and body made up of formalized rules (modern sports and competitive games like chess, not being ugly voyeuristic fighting as the mouth-breathers and other anti-intellectual consumerist trash who voyeurise it on TV believe, despite knowing little to nothing about what goes on in the minds of the athletes or competitors in question - having themselves, being an evolution up from more primitive "contests", such as duels and political violence of the past). Such a thing, of course, is not something anyone could "win" at to begin with, given that it is not a game, so much as just mindless ADHD violence or 'fighting' akin to what one might watch on Jerry Springer or Maury, whatever funny little approximations or "bets" idiots might place on such a thing, whether we're talking Alexander Dugin and the associated conspiracy theories and worthless mythical notions of the "West" which so often accompany them, and wouldn't be worth any remotely sane person's time to care about to begin with unless they're incredibly naïve, idiotic, and otherwise worthless and pathetic, devoid of any actual forecasting methodology like that of Phillip Tetlock.

    So, in spite of such a hideious world view being seen as "edgy" to ugly mouth-breathers and other defectives, lacking any redeeming evolved qualities such as intellect, 1st world morality, creativity, character, and other qualities, such a think is as archaic, old, and unoriginal, regardless of what ugly, "new" form or veneer it takes (whether "fascism" or "anarchy" silly devolved stuff like "red pill" or whatnot, or anything else), as old as the feral defective impulses of dogs and other less mathematatically or aesthetically incinded individuals (simplistic, anti-intellectual "math" or "arithmetic" and its archaic calcualtions, of course not being the same as pure mathematics or the mathematical mind or insight which might accompany such a thing), to the point that one would honestly wonder whether or not anyone too dumb, unintelligent, maladjusted, or otherwise inferior to play anything resembling a real sport, game, or contest rather than mindlessly voyeurisic it would have ever even bothered with such an inferior thing to begin with.

    With this said, let's just remove such a trite and ugly ideology, so often preferred by the sexless, the ugly, the unintelligent, the monotonous, the old, outdated, and regressive in pretty much every area simply be flushed down the proverbial toilet so to speak, replaced by superior and more aesthetically, evolved, creative, modern, contemporary, and otherwise non-impulsively inclinded worldviews replace and supplant it, other than among the few hidieous and archaic defectives and primates worthless, useless, and socially replacable enough to have to actually depend on it to begin with, let alone even want to. Ta Ta.
     
  2. Oddball
    Online

    Oddball Unobtanium Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2009
    Messages:
    59,385
    Thanks Received:
    12,712
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    Drinking wine, eating cheese, catching rays
    Ratings:
    +45,482
    tl;dr
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Funny and Agree!! Funny and Agree!! x 1
  3. rightwinger
    Online

    rightwinger Award Winning USMB Paid Messageboard Poster Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2009
    Messages:
    199,036
    Thanks Received:
    28,407
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Ratings:
    +106,343
    tl; dr
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. Toddsterpatriot
    Offline

    Toddsterpatriot Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    55,949
    Thanks Received:
    6,822
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Location:
    Chicago
    Ratings:
    +31,252
    So we can kill the atheists?
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
    • Funny and Agree!! Funny and Agree!! x 1
  5. ding
    Offline

    ding Confront reality

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2016
    Messages:
    64,502
    Thanks Received:
    2,585
    Trophy Points:
    1,855
    Ratings:
    +22,376
    Here’s a thought. Evolution can be thought of as anything which moves from a less complex state to a more complex state; a more simple state to a more advanced state. When viewed upon through this lens there have been 5 distinct evolutionary phases to the evolution of energy; cosmic evolution which was the formation of hydrogen and helium from subatomic particles, stellar evolution which was the formation of the structure of the universe from hydrogen and helium; chemical evolution which was creation of all the elements through supernovas and the resulting chemical compounds, biological evolution which was the leap from innate matter to a simple living organism and the resulting rich tapestry of life, and the evolution of consciousness which resulted in the universe knowing itself.

    So I am left with two questions.

    Why can’t consciousness evolve and make a leap to a more complex and advanced state just as every evolutionary phase did before it?

    What would that next leap be or look like?

    Any takers?
     
  6. ding
    Offline

    ding Confront reality

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2016
    Messages:
    64,502
    Thanks Received:
    2,585
    Trophy Points:
    1,855
    Ratings:
    +22,376
    ^^^ not social Darwinism.
     
  7. Hollie
    Offline

    Hollie Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2012
    Messages:
    33,803
    Thanks Received:
    2,942
    Trophy Points:
    1,115
    Ratings:
    +11,304
    You really could have used just a couple of sentences to condense that rambling tirade into a much shorter rambling tirade.
     
    • Funny and Agree!! Funny and Agree!! x 1
  8. Questioner
    Offline

    Questioner Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2019
    Messages:
    1,584
    Thanks Received:
    77
    Trophy Points:
    50
    Ratings:
    +552
    Good point, in order for evolution to be "evolution" to begin with (the roots of the word meaning "maturity" or "growth"), there would have to be something which it isn't (e.x. de-volution).

    Or else, there's no reason to call it "evolution" to begin with; you might as well just call it "pizza pie".
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  9. C_Clayton_Jones
    Offline

    C_Clayton_Jones Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2011
    Messages:
    53,340
    Thanks Received:
    11,091
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Location:
    In a Republic, actually
    Ratings:
    +38,461
    Conservative political, social, and cultural dogma is likewise ugly and ineffective because it’s predicated on social Darwinism.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  10. Questioner
    Offline

    Questioner Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2019
    Messages:
    1,584
    Thanks Received:
    77
    Trophy Points:
    50
    Ratings:
    +552
    That's a non-sequitur; Russel Kirk is a conservative philosopher which I use as a such a reference.
     

Share This Page