Darwin quote

[Votto]

“With savages, the weak in body or mind are soon eliminated; and those that survive commonly exhibit a vigorous state of health. 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 which we feel impelled to give to the helpless is mainly an incidental result of the instinct of sympathy, which was originally acquired as part of the social instincts, but subsequently rendered, in the manner previously indicated, more tender and more widely diffused. Nor could we check our sympathy, if so urged by hard reason, without deterioration in the noblest part of our nature. The surgeon may harden himself whilst performing an operation, for he knows that he is acting for the good of his patient; but if we were intentionally to neglect the weak and helpless, it could only be for a contingent benefit, with a certain and great present evil. Hence we must bear without complaining the undoubtedly bad effects of the weak surviving and propagating their kind; but there appears to be at least one check in steady action, namely the weaker and inferior members of society not marrying so freely as the sound; and this check might be indefinitely increased, though this is more to be hoped for than expected, by the weak in body or mind refraining from marriage.”
― Charles Darwin, The Descent of Man ."

So who here agrees with Darwin and who disagrees?

 

[norwegen]

I agree. If we hadn't helped the helpless, then we wouldn't have so many liberals.

 

[TheOldSchool]

I agree. If we hadn't helped the helpless, then we wouldn't have so many liberals.

^ doesn’t know red states have the highest participation rates for food stamps and welfare

 

[Votto]

Speaking as a scientist, do scientists here have a problem with Darwin speaking of "evil" and our "noble nature"?

 

[JoeMoma]

Speaking as a scientist, do scientists here have a problem with Darwin speaking of "evil" and our "noble nature"?

Scientist are first human. I don't have a problem with it.

 

[JoeMoma]

“With savages, the weak in body or mind are soon eliminated; and those that survive commonly exhibit a vigorous state of health. 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 which we feel impelled to give to the helpless is mainly an incidental result of the instinct of sympathy, which was originally acquired as part of the social instincts, but subsequently rendered, in the manner previously indicated, more tender and more widely diffused. Nor could we check our sympathy, if so urged by hard reason, without deterioration in the noblest part of our nature. The surgeon may harden himself whilst performing an operation, for he knows that he is acting for the good of his patient; but if we were intentionally to neglect the weak and helpless, it could only be for a contingent benefit, with a certain and great present evil. Hence we must bear without complaining the undoubtedly bad effects of the weak surviving and propagating their kind; but there appears to be at least one check in steady action, namely the weaker and inferior members of society not marrying so freely as the sound; and this check might be indefinitely increased, though this is more to be hoped for than expected, by the weak in body or mind refraining from marriage.”
― Charles Darwin, The Descent of Man ."

So who here agrees with Darwin and who disagrees?

I agree with the premise Darwin Presents. Because we have become "civilized" and we help the weak that would otherwise not survive to reproduce, our species is becoming less resilient in some ways. This could be why so many kids today suffer form peanut allergies today, among other things.

On the other hand, we more than make up for this propagation of weakness through technological advances. Many diseases may soon be cured or eliminated through genetic engineering. Though the ethics is questionable, genetic engineering has the potential of advancing our species exponentially more quickly and efficiently than natural selection ever could.

 

[Wuwei]

I agree with the premise. Someone went one step further and said that with more intelligent women seeking careers and not having babies, the gene pool is degrading further.

 

[abu afak]

Intra-species competition is the norm for all of nature.
The more 'fit' or adapted, or evolved, usually supplant other subspecies/races when they contact.
Those Homo, Human, etc, goups have always wiped out the weaker when given the chance.

In the last 75 years of so, for the first time in the history of nature/evolution/ANY specie, more able human groups have in good part stopped using their competitive advantages. Genocide and Colonialism by First World countries has stopped and reversed.
Even more recently, the Birth Rates of the most advantaged of the Species have plummeted, and along with aid, their cures for diseases (Polio, AIDS, Ebola, Malaria, etc, etc) have let third world group's populations explode. Even privately, people like Bill Gates are giving Tens of Billions of First World money to the Third.

So, again, for the first time in the Billion+ year history of Evo, the less able are out-reproducing/out-surviving the more able.
To such a point, that Immigration from those now overpopulated countries/areas/groups is changing the demographic of the First World countries.

Dysgenic.
abu afak/mbig

 

[zaangalewa]

“With savages, the weak in body or mind are soon eliminated; and those that survive commonly exhibit a vigorous state of health. 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. …

What Darwin here says has nothing to do with the real scientific theory of biological evolution, what a man should know, who shares about 55% of his genetic information with a banana. With such thoughts the racist Darwin was a mentor of the Nazis and their racial nonsense.

 

[Weatherman2020]

The left love Darwin because he says whites are a more advanced race than blacks.

 

[zaangalewa]

“With savages, the weak in body or mind are soon eliminated; and those that survive commonly exhibit a vigorous state of health. 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 which we feel impelled to give to the helpless is mainly an incidental result of the instinct of sympathy, which was originally acquired as part of the social instincts, but subsequently rendered, in the manner previously indicated, more tender and more widely diffused. Nor could we check our sympathy, if so urged by hard reason, without deterioration in the noblest part of our nature. The surgeon may harden himself whilst performing an operation, for he knows that he is acting for the good of his patient; but if we were intentionally to neglect the weak and helpless, it could only be for a contingent benefit, with a certain and great present evil. Hence we must bear without complaining the undoubtedly bad effects of the weak surviving and propagating their kind; but there appears to be at least one check in steady action, namely the weaker and inferior members of society not marrying so freely as the sound; and this check might be indefinitely increased, though this is more to be hoped for than expected, by the weak in body or mind refraining from marriage.”
― Charles Darwin, The Descent of Man ."

So who here agrees with Darwin and who disagrees?

I agree with the premise Darwin Presents. Because we have become "civilized" and we help the weak that would otherwise not survive to reproduce, our species is becoming less resilient in some ways. This could be why so many kids today suffer form peanut allergies today, among other things.

My wife has an allergy against kiwi for example - but not against kiwi which are produced from biological agriculture. So it seem not to be the kiwi itself which is the problem - I guess it is an artificial substance. I don't know how many artificial substances are in the nature meanwhile. A biological adaptation to a kind of hell of strange substances could perhaps mean be we will lose our brains and will evolve to resistant worms. We don't know. We should really respect mother Earth = our environment.

On the other hand, we more than make up for this propagation of weakness through technological advances. Many diseases may soon be cured or eliminated through genetic engineering. Though the ethics is questionable, genetic engineering has the potential of advancing our species exponentially more quickly and efficiently than natural selection ever could.

What would we win if we would adapt human beings to be able to earn billions of Dollars for example? Indeed money is only a tool like a hammer - but we make it to a myth. The most productive "theologies" of the planet are for example "economic theories". If we try to make human beings with genetical methods "intelligent", "beautiful, "rich" and "sane" then we produce something what we think - but not something what lives in the reality of the universe. Do you know what "hyggelig" is? I hope not. It's a Danish word. So how is someone able to adapt human beings biologically to the real existing quality "to be able to be hyggelig" if he knows not what it is? And what if he adapts human beings to something else - for example a better stress-resistance - and human beings will lose the quality "to be able to be hyggelig". Misses a dog hands? No. His snout and paw are like hands for him. But perhaps we will miss our own way, if we modify, what we don't know. Genetics is still only something like a game of children with an indelible fire. And you know what had happened in the end with Prometheus.

 

[harmonica]

what does he mean by ''savages''?
do not/have not humans helped the weak?? in their communities?

 

[IsaacNewton]

Many species help their kind. Many species help other species, dogs fight for humans, dolphins save humans, humans save dolphins, and in very few cases do any of them know which are the 'weak' individuals and which aren't. Such traits are generally found in higher functioning level brains. The action to help or save another living being is based on empathy.

Snakes don't save snakes, fish don't help other fish, bacteria aren't philanthropists. And likely there are a few instances with even reptiles where they exhibit 'caring' behavior but smaller less developed brains tend to be geared towards kill or be killed. Empathy is lacking.

The same can be said of humans, the less developed brains tend towards animalistic behavior on the whole. Educated people are far more civil and less prone to want to fight at the drop of a hat. They will fight if necessary as all animals will, but on the whole education removes much of the fear of 'not knowing' and the need to 'win at all costs'. This last thing is what accounts for most of the ills of the human race, people that view losing in any capacity as death to their inner self. It is why gang members are so violent and go quickly to a gun to settle even the smallest dispute. Their inner self image is threatened to be shattered if they back down at all. Many people exhibit this in many venues. At sporting events. Road rage is almost always a case of 'I must win at all costs'. You see it online constantly and it is worse online because you are anonymous and out of reach so people just get into the gutter right away much of the time.

Also cooperation among primates assists survival so it is a positive evolutionary trait. Otherwise it wouldn't exist, it would have been selected out eons ago. Survival of the fittest doesn't mean the strongest or most violent. It means evolving of traits that allow that species to survive and thrive in an environment. Docile traits many times are far better at allowing animals to survive than violent ones.

 

[zaangalewa]

IsaacNewton

Funny?

 

[zaangalewa]

Many species help their kind. Many species help other species, dogs fight for humans, dolphins save humans, humans save dolphins, and in very few cases do any of them know which are the 'weak' individuals and which aren't. Such traits are generally found in higher functioning level brains. The action to help or save another living being is based on empathy.

Snakes don't save snakes, fish don't help other fish, bacteria aren't philanthropists. And likely there are a few instances with even reptiles where they exhibit 'caring' behavior but smaller less developed brains tend to be geared towards kill or be killed. Empathy is lacking.

The same can be said of humans, the less developed brains tend towards animalistic behavior on the whole. Educated people are far more civil and less prone to want to fight at the drop of a hat. They will fight if necessary as all animals will, but on the whole education removes much of the fear of 'not knowing' and the need to 'win at all costs'. This last thing is what accounts for most of the ills of the human race, people that view losing in any capacity as death to their inner self. It is why gang members are so violent and go quickly to a gun to settle even the smallest dispute. Their inner self image is threatened to be shattered if they back down at all. Many people exhibit this in many venues. At sporting events. Road rage is almost always a case of 'I must win at all costs'. You see it online constantly and it is worse online because you are anonymous and out of reach so people just get into the gutter right away much of the time.

Also cooperation among primates assists survival so it is a positive evolutionary trait. Otherwise it wouldn't exist, it would have been selected out eons ago. Survival of the fittest doesn't mean the strongest or most violent. It means evolving of traits that allow that species to survive and thrive in an environment. Docile traits many times are far better at allowing animals to survive than violent ones.

Did you say here anything at all? For example: Sure bacteriae are not philanthropists - but every second cell in the body of a human being is a bacteria. Without this bacteriae a human being will not survive.