Richard Dawkins stepped in it on eugenics but isn't it the end result of evolution?

a reply to: strongfp

Do you have proof God doesn’t exist or is that just your opinion? In the absence of certainty your beliefs are based on faith just like everyone else.

a reply to: Metallicus

By definition gods do not exist. By historical accounts and records, gods are constructs invented by people, humans. The most common consensus between scholars, scientists, historians, etc. is that gods aren't real. So the ball is in the court of the people who believe there is gods to prove there is.

a reply to: strongfp

You have faith in your beliefs as do we all.

Opinions on the internet. *YAWN*

Nothing like sensational headlines on a slow news day to get the blood pumping.

a reply to: neoholographic

Of course, there are more than two possible ways to go forward from concluding that humans do not prefer to think of ourselves as "just animals"

We could acknowledge the practicality of what this view implies and then attempt to move our efforts in that direction until they conflict too greatly with ethical concerns. We could also stop teaching kids nonsensical mythology and give them a proper education and send them into the world with known, tested, proven facts. At which point, we could appeal to the rational side of their brain when ASKING THEM NICELY to do the right thing (for example, choosing not to breed if they live in an overcrowded area or if they know they have deficits that would cause them to be bad parents or cause their offspring to have serious psychological or physical health issues.

The emotional, irrational side of the human mind exists. It doesn't have to completely override the rational side. If you work at it, you can find compromises that both sides of the mind can accept. But only if you eschew dogma.

neoholographic:

It's why Hitler's Germany supported Dawkins view of evolution.

Hitler didn't support Dawkins view of evolution, it was Darwin's view of evolution he twisted to fit his own ideology.

neoholographic:

This comes from God. The Bible says the Spirit of God dwells within us.

No. Our higher self-sentient faculty did not come from a mythical God, it came about through natural evolution. All life has a form of sentient faculty, the difference is merely by degrees and how it can be expressed via the material body structure.

Dawkins is right with both tweets of his opinion. He is not calling for eugenics to be instigated, he is stating that it would work for human beings in a same or similar way it does for other life forms. Be under no illusion (your belief in a God notwithstanding), there most probably are those in positions of both power and influence who will view eugenics as a means to save the human race in the long run, and would not hesitate to see it instigated at the right moment.

If a global eugenics program is ever set in motion (if it already isn't?), your belief in a God will not save you or the billions of others that it will be aimed at.

By the way, irrespective of how people view the human being, the human being is most certainly an animal.

a reply to: elysiumfire

Hitler's Nazi Germany supported the likes of Phrenology ffs.

Racist pseudoscience twisted to suit an agenda.

As to us being animal, that's a given, but we are good at using tools and that is perhaps what sets our species apart more than anything else.

a reply to: elysiumfire

In your opinion and we all know what opinions are like don’t we?

Humans are significantly more than animals in my opinion and your opinion is no more valid than mine
In fact scientific evidence would suggest humans are significantly more than animals
Just for me to make that statement proves that statement

Irrespective you ignored the issue
Eugenics is the end result of evolution, people like you do or will in time see humanity, your partner and offspring as cattle. Healthy or unhealthy, live or die for the collective, that’s eugenics

God didn’t say He was going to save our lives here, just return it to us where He is

originally posted by: neoholographic
The fact is, humans inherently know we're not just animals and that's why you have outrage at Dawkins comments.

Not really, only idiots are outraged because they don't understand the point he is making.

To be fair, he should know better. What good can really come of this tweet?

He's probably got a book coming out.

Raggedyman:

In fact scientific evidence would suggest humans are significantly more than animals.

It all depends on how you use the term 'more'. Body structure plays a very important part in how a life form expresses its intelligence and its awareness.

Your domesticated canine is far 'more' capable at scents and scenting than any human being, and all dogs have the faculty to an equal degree. Some human beings are 'more' capable of using and understanding higher mathematics, should we class them as being higher human beings? By your logic, we should.

God didn’t say He was going to save our lives here, just return it to us where He is.

Actually, God didn't say anything, the myth is not real, it doesn't and never did exist. Your belief in this makes your opinion somewhat suspect to say the least.

a reply to: elysiumfire

Your welcome to believe whatever you want about Gods existence or not, to presume I rate your opinion on the matter is foolish

As for animals and their sense, more than yours evidently😬

Yes, those with a higher mathematical complex understanding are classified as more valued in society.
Didn’t you notice?
Maybe you are right, maybe some people have the capacity of thought equivalent to animals


Go look at the annual earnings of a mathematician and say they are not more valued than you or I, unbelievable statement

If you don’t value those with an advanced mind or education as a better option in business, your business is destined to fail
That’s called common sense


Just thinking the first animal in space was a dog, pretty smart dog I guess

a reply to: Raggedyman

The poor animal died up there.

If it was smart, it would have done the off the first time they let it out for a crap.

We are indeed all animals Raggedyman, and a product of evolution.

We would have a hard time existing on Earth if that were not the case.

Are we more than the sum of our parts seems to be the real question, and on that note, further study is most definitely required.

originally posted by: Raggedyman

Irrespective you ignored the issue
Eugenics is the end result of evolution, people like you do or will in time see humanity, your partner and offspring as cattle. Healthy or unhealthy, live or die for the collective, that’s eugenics

There is no end result of evolution.
That's kinda the point.

If you're into eugenics you have got to study evolutionary theory so perhaps you are correct in a way. Much like nuclear weapons are a result of physics.

It's a good thing the world's most famous evolution guy is speaking out against it I guess.

a reply to: andy06shake

Your opinion is valid to yourself not me

I believe humans are significantly more spiritual than those of the animal kingdom
My opinion vs yours

Believe as you wish, it means nothing to reality, a reality we are still unraveling

a reply to: Krahzeef_Ukhar

The end result of evolution?
Evolution has an unimaginable amount of end results.
The “end result” statement is made in isolation, relating to this thread and eugenics specifically

It’s a valid statement in context in my opinion

a reply to: Raggedyman

Thanks for stating the obvious.

As to humans being significantly more spiritual than animals. LoL

Look at what we get up to and do to one another for sport no less?

We certainly have a greater capacity for evil than the rest of the animals, as to spirituality, there is possibly something to the notion, it remains to be seen and proven all the same.

Believe is all about perspective Raggedyman, which is a very personal experience.

As to reality, it might turn out to be not all it cracked up to be religiously speaking.

Its the only one we have as far as we can establish thus far, put it that way.

a reply to: andy06shake

Yep, look at what we do to each other, though, we do have a choice and a conscience.
Some people choose good some bad

Not everyone chooses bad, after a few lessons of course

a reply to: Raggedyman

I like to think that the average person chooses to do good rather than bad.

The thing is life does not always make it so easy.

People become twisted and ambivalent down to them being a product of society.

Good and bad are very human constructs all the same.

Nature does not entertain any such illusions.

End of the day none of us are getting out of this life alive, may as well make hay whilst the Sun shines so to speak.

The trick is to do so without hurting anyone weaker than yourself and have fun in the process.

everyone being all "u mad cus eugenics works" should have a word to, say, any dog of pure breed, most of whom have a range of nasty genetic conditions, from blatantly obvious ones like pugs who have breathing difficulties to the many many breeds that have excessive rates of epilepsy. Or to the Betta [the siamese fighting fish], who we bred for aggression and pretty scales, to the point where they now can't be kept in the same tank together and many strains have scales that grow right over their eyes and make them go blind.
That's some real Icarus business right there.
and that's for individuals that are the IDEAL, HEALTHY version of their particular breed.
yeah, "works".

a reply to: continuousThunder

Aye, there is a lot to be said for mongrels, best Dogs ive ever had.

Nothing wrong with mixed breeds, in people or dogs and kind of how evolution ticks along, with the best always managing to find a way.