From Darwin’s Descent of Man

[loco]

You could just as well claim that Hitler twisted the words of Darwin.

I guess you could, but is that really what happened?

[OzmO]

The referee is not clear. In any event Hitler was far more inspired by centuries of Christian inspired anti-semitism than he was by Darwin.

But to what degree?  Hitler was far more inspired by hate, he could have found a number of things to justify his actions.  Darwin and Luther are only what he chose.

[Deedee]

Herein lie the answers to all of Loco's questions and concerns regarding Hitler and Darwin. 

http://wiki.cotch.net/index.php/Hitler_based_his_views_on_Darwinism

[loco]

Herein lie the answers to all of Loco's questions and concerns regarding Hitler and Darwin. 

http://wiki.cotch.net/index.php/Hitler_based_his_views_on_Darwinism

And what are my questions and concerns, Deedee?  Why are you jumping to conclusions and making assumptions about me and telling me to go read history books?  It was not me who first brought up the fact that Darwin inspired Hitler, it was Nordic Superman.  Why aren't you having this discussion with him and why are you not addressing him but me instead?  Is it because he is an atheist and I'm a Christian?

And I did not start the "evolutionists are good/bad/worse, creationists are good/bad/worse" argument.  You did.

Why are you, a Christian, so bitter toward Christians, making claims that "the devout" have brought more misery and death than the non-religious, that Luther was anti-Semite, that Christians on this board have said worse things than Darwin’s Descent of Man?  You are entitled to feel and say whatever you want.  I'm just curious.

Read/Discuss

"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 everyone 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 anyone 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 the 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 the 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

[loco]

Well, it's very possible that I am confused. I am a Lutheran Protestant, so can you blame me, what with all the confusing messages concerning love and hatred?

The remedy to your confusion then would be to look to Jesus Christ and not to fallible humans.  In Jesus there are no confusing messages concerning love and hatred.

What's a Lutheran Protestant?  Aren't all Lutherans protestants?  Is there such a thing as a Lutheran Roman Catholic?

[Dos Equis]

Okay that makes 4  in this thread. Are you unaware that this is your signature post reply?

The formal Victorian english is difficult to grasp but after reading it over 3 or 4 times the meaning of this portion of the Darwin quote should become clear:

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 the 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 the 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.

Those are hardly the words of a genocidal racist.  For you, special -------> 

MMC78 made note of the shifting moral Zeitgeist and he has a very valid point about what is acceptabled, as well as accepted, public discourse depending on what time and place in history the discourse took place.

Further, during that era it was common for the mentally ill or mentally challanged to be referred to as imbeciles, and this is also how the American Christians who helped organize and wholeheartedly supported the eugenics program referred to these people as well.

In simple word-speak what Darwin said  is this:

Certain individuals, like schizophrenics and chronic alcoholics, to give two examples, have an increased chance of producing children with birth defects or inherited mental illness.  Morally of course we can't stand in the way of allowing such individuals to propegate, so the best we can do is hope that they would not.

Doesn't sound like Hitler's playbook to me. Where's the call to violence or eradication of a people? Many of the posters on this board, Christians included, say far worse on a daily basis.

Dumb comments get the eye roll.  I'll continue to use it often.

What Darwin essentially said was this:  let the mentally and physically disabled die.  There is no way to reasonably sugarcoat that position.  It has nothing to do with Christianity.  It is precisely what Hitler wanted to do.  I just saw nearly an entire floor of the Holocaust Museum that walked through Hitler's attempt to exterminate "imbeciles," including children. 

Regarding Darwin and his racism, that can't be reasonably refuted either:

At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilized races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes … will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilized state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the negro or Australian and the gorilla.

http://www.mediamonitors.net/harunyahya44.html

[Deedee]

And what are my concerns, Deedee?  Why are you jumping to conclusions and making assumptions about me and telling me to go read history books?  It was not me who first brought up the fact that Darwin inspired Hitler, it was Nordic Superman.  Why aren't you having this discussing with him and why are you not addressing him but me instead?

And it wasn't me who started the "evolutionists are good/bad/worse, creationists are good/bad/worse" argument.  You did.

Why are you, a Christian, so bitter toward Christians, making claims that "the devout" have brought more misery and death than the non-religious, that Luther was anti-Semite, that Christians on this board have said worse things than Darwin’s Descent of Man?  You are entitled to feel and say whatever you want.  I'm just curious.

Read/Discuss

I don't know exactly what your concerns are.  I did address NS but it was you who replied, and kept on posting back when I answered.  (And btw, it was Beach Bum who first brought up Hitler, not NS.)

I'm not jumping to conclusions about you at all. Just responding to your comments and questions you've posted quoting me. if you're hell bent on blaming Hitler's actions as a consequence of evolutionary theories, go ahead, but you're wrong to do so. If you think Darwin was a racist, you're wrong there too.

I'm not bitter toward christians at all.  Because I'm a Lutheran Protestant, does that mean I shouldn't criticize Luther?  Lol. You asked ME why I said what I did about religion and misery, so I pointed you toward a history book and in addition gave you some examples of why I thought so.  

Lots of people on this board talk about genetics, both inferior and superior, as it's a body building board... and secondly there are a number of posters on Getbig who talk about ghetto people and others they consider human trash. I'm not upset by it, it doesn't make me bitter... just stating what is true.

[loco]

I don't know exactly what your concerns are.  I did address NS but it was you who replied, and kept on posting back when I answered.  (And btw, it was Beach Bum who first brought up Hitler, not NS.)

I'm not jumping to conclusions about you at all. Just responding to your comments and questions you've posted quoting me. if you're hell bent on blaming Hitler's actions as a consequence of evolutionary theories, go ahead, but you're wrong to do so. If you think Darwin was a racist, you're wrong there too.

I'm not bitter toward christians at all.  Because I'm a Lutheran Protestant, does that mean I shouldn't criticize Luther?  Lol. You asked ME why I said what I did about religion and misery, so I pointed you toward a history book and in addition gave you some examples of why I thought so.  

Lots of people on this board talk about genetics, both inferior and superior, as it's a body building board... and secondly there are a number of posters on Getbig who talk about ghetto people and others they consider human trash. I'm not upset by it, it doesn't make me bitter... just stating what is true.

The only one saying I'm hell bent on blaming Hitler's actions as a consequence of evolutionary theories is you.  I am not.  I only re-stated what NS had already stated, that Darwin inspired Hitler, which is a fact and not a mere claim on my part.  You addressed me, not NS.  That is why I responded to you. 

And it was NS who brought it up first.  Beach Bum did not know that Darwin inspired Hitler.  Beach Bum simply said that Darwin’s Descent of Man looked like something from Hitler, which is interesting that Beach Bum came to that conclusion all by himself without knowing the rest of the story. 

As for posters on Getbig who talk about ghetto people and others they consider human trash, are any of these posters Christians on the Religious board?

[Deicide]

Hitler was not soley inspired but Darwin; he was inspired by lots of things, first and foremost, by centuries of Christian persecution.

And in any event, none of this changes the fact of evolution.

[loco]

Hitler was not soley inspired but Darwin; he was inspired by lots of things,

True

first and foremost, by centuries of Christian persecution.

False

[OzmO]

first and foremost, by centuries of Christian persecution.

That couldn't be further form the truth.   He used Darwinism to justify his actions along with Christianity.

What inspired Hitler was the economic fall out from WW1 and the treaty of Versailles plunging Germany into depression and the Jews flourishing in many ways during that time.  Many people resented the Jews.  Hitler saw an opportunity to give Germans something to hate and bring them together.

[Decker]

Are you not aware that Hitler himself was a huge fan of Darwin and justified his brutality against the Jews with Darwinism. He thought he was doing mankind a favour creating his Aryan super race.

I thought Hitler was a huge fan of Darwin b/c he could mold natural selection to fit his propaganda technique for demonizing the Jews giving the German people a singular enemy to rally against under Hitler's direction.  Isn't that more in line with the ideas expressed in Mein Kampf?

[Decker]

That couldn't be further form the truth.   He used Darwinism to justify his actions along with Christianity.

What inspired Hitler was the economic fall out from WW1 and the treaty of Versailles plunging Germany into depression and the Jews flourishing in many ways during that time.  Many people resented the Jews.  Hitler saw an opportunity to give Germans something to hate and bring them together.

Exactly.

[Deedee]

The only one saying I'm hell bent on blaming Hitler's actions as a consequence of evolutionary theories is you.  I am not.  I only re-stated what NS had already stated, that Darwin inspired Hitler, which is a fact and not a mere claim on my part.  You addressed me, not NS.  That is why I responded to you. 

And it was NS who brought it up first.  Beach Bum did not know that Darwin inspired Hitler.  Beach Bum simply said that Darwin’s Descent of Man looked like something from Hitler, which is interesting that Beach Bum came to that conclusion all by himself without knowing the rest of the story. 

As for posters on Getbig who talk about ghetto people and others they consider human trash, are any of these posters Christians on the Religious board?

Oh for god's sake... this is just ridiculous.  You know your argument fell apart and now you're wriggling around, taking it all personally.  I kept replying to you, that's what is clear from the posts.  Lol, and Beach Bum is the second person who answered, clearly mentioning "Hitler's playbook" in his post.

Darwin himself did not inspire Hitler at all. Read the link I posted for you. It was the theory of evolution, smushed in with his own vision of superior races under God that inspired him. The theory itself lives outside of Darwin. And Hitler was ALSO inspired by all of the factors mentioned above and elsewhere and your dogged refusal to accept it, doesn't change anything.

There are one or two posters who have written in a racist way, and who post on other boards as well as this one.  I don't think negative posts are tolerated here.

[loco]

Oh for god's sake... this is just ridiculous.  You know your argument fell apart and now you're wriggling around, taking it all personally.  I kept replying to you, that's what is clear from the posts.  Lol, and Beach Bum is the second person who answered, clearly mentioning "Hitler's playbook" in his post.

Darwin himself did not inspire Hitler at all. Read the link I posted for you. It was the theory of evolution, smushed in with his own vision of superior races under God that inspired him. The theory itself lives outside of Darwin. And Hitler was ALSO inspired by all of the factors mentioned above and elsewhere and your dogged refusal to accept it, doesn't change anything.

There are one or two posters who have written in a racist way, and who post on other boards as well as this one.  I don't think negative posts are tolerated here.

My argument fell apart?  What argument is that?

[Nordic Superman]

Darwin himself did not inspire Hitler at all. Read the link I posted for you. It was the theory of evolution, smushed in with his own vision of superior races under God that inspired him. The theory itself lives outside of Darwin. And Hitler was ALSO inspired by all of the factors mentioned above and elsewhere and your dogged refusal to accept it, doesn't change anything.

No offence, but wouldn't it be safe to assume that when they say things such as "Darwin inspired Hitler's holocaust", they really mean "Darwinism inspired Hitler's holocaust"?

[Deedee]

Dumb comments get the eye roll.  I'll continue to use it often.

What Darwin essentially said was this:  let the mentally and physically disabled die.  There is no way to reasonably sugarcoat that position.  It has nothing to do with Christianity.  It is precisely what Hitler wanted to do.  I just saw nearly an entire floor of the Holocaust Museum that walked through Hitler's attempt to exterminate "imbeciles," including children. 

Regarding Darwin and his racism, that can't be reasonably refuted either:

At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilized races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes … will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilized state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the negro or Australian and the gorilla.

http://www.mediamonitors.net/harunyahya44.html

I wasn't trying to dissuade you from your highly intelligent, mature   responses.  Most people use words, or if a comment is too dumb, simply ignore it, so your disdainful emoticon responses are always refreshing and a welcome respite from the ordinary.

Beach, I'm glad you took an opportunity to read something, since obviously you barely skimmed the original passage but felt inclined to answer it anyway.  Maybe you should read Darwin's work in its entirety, read it in the context of the times, then get back to us.

Sadly I have a far more intimate knowledge of what went on in Hitler's Germany than you ever will, and I don't find it particularly relevant to any discussion of Darwin. We'll have to disagree on that.

[Deedee]

No offence, but wouldn't it be safe to assume that when they say things such as "Darwin inspired Hitler's holocaust", they really mean "Darwinism inspired Hitler's holocaust"?

No offence taken... it seems to me they're targeting the man himself, but you may be right. On the other hand some people have this to say:

Hitler never mentioned Darwin nor did his view of nature reflect any substantive understanding of evolution. In fact, Hitler's racism was based on the view that "races were created distinct by God" and he frequently cited works such as Martin Luther's "On the Jews and their Lies" as guides to his policies.

[loco]

No offence taken... it seems to me they're targeting the man himself, but you may be right. On the other hand some people have this to say:

Hitler never mentioned Darwin nor did his view of nature reflect any substantive understanding of evolution. In fact, Hitler's racism was based on the view that "races were created distinct by God" and he frequently cited works such as Martin Luther's "On the Jews and their Lies" as guides to his policies.

Deedee, who is targeting the man himself?  Call it Darwin, Darwinism, Evolution as you said earlier.  Personally, I'm not here making stuff up and making false claims.  I'm just going by what I read and I am posting my references.  I do appreciate your participation.  Where did you get the above quote and who is it by?

Deedee, are you German? 

What do you think of these?

"Darwinism by itself did not produce the Holocaust, but without Darwinism, especially in its social Darwinist and eugenics permutations, neither Hitler nor his Nazi followers would have had the necessary scientific underpinnings to convince themselves and their collaborators that one of the world's greatest atrocities was really morally praiseworthy. Darwinism - or at least some naturalistic interpretation of darwinism - succeeded in turning morality on its head." 
Richard Weikart, From Darwin to Hitler, Evolutionary Ethics, Eugenics and Racism in Germany
 
"Hitler believed in struggle as a Darwinian principle of human life that forced every people to try to dominate all others; without struggle they would rot and perish … . Even in his own defeat in April 1945, Hitler expressed his faith in the survival of the stronger and declared the Slavic peoples to have proven themselves the stronger." 
Peter Hoffman, Hitler's Personal Security (Oxford, UK: Pergamon Press, 1979), p. 264.

"To see evolutionary measures and tribal morality being applied vigorously to the affairs of a great modern nation, we must turn again to Germany of 1942. We see Hitler devoutly convinced that evolution produces the only real basis for a national policy … . The means he adopted to secure the destiny of his race and people were organized slaughter, which has drenched Europe in blood … . Such conduct is highly immoral as measured by every scale of ethics, yet Germany justifies it; it is consonant with tribal or evolutionary morality. Germany has reverted to the tribal past, and is demonstrating to the world, in their naked ferocity, the methods of evolution."
Sir Arthur Keith, Evolution and Ethics (New York: Putman, 1947), p. 28.

"I assumed that Darwin's theory of evolution and "Social Darwinism" were substantially distinct, and that "Social Darwinism" was a twisting of Darwin's theory in a way that Darwin would not have approved. Then I read Charles Darwin's Descent of Man and realized that my simplistic dichotomy between Darwin and "Social Darwinism" could not be maintained."
Dr. John G. West, Darwin Day In America: How Our Politics and Culture Have Been Dehumanized in the Name of Science

[Nordic Superman]

No offence taken... it seems to me they're targeting the man himself, but you may be right. On the other hand some people have this to say:

Hitler never mentioned Darwin nor did his view of nature reflect any substantive understanding of evolution. In fact, Hitler's racism was based on the view that "races were created distinct by God" and he frequently cited works such as Martin Luther's "On the Jews and their Lies" as guides to his policies.

Hmm maybe.

But how do you explain killing cripples, mental patients, people with physical and mental retardation - regardless of race?

[Dos Equis]

And it was NS who brought it up first.  Beach Bum did not know that Darwin inspired Hitler.  Beach Bum simply said that Darwin’s Descent of Man looked like something from Hitler, which is interesting that Beach Bum came to that conclusion all by himself without knowing the rest of the story. 

Correct again.  I simply read the passage and posted a comment. 

[Dos Equis]

I wasn't trying to dissuade you from your highly intelligent, mature   responses.  Most people use words, or if a comment is too dumb, simply ignore it, so your disdainful emoticon responses are always refreshing and a welcome respite from the ordinary.

Beach, I'm glad you took an opportunity to read something, since obviously you barely skimmed the original passage but felt inclined to answer it anyway.  Maybe you should read Darwin's work in its entirety, read it in the context of the times, then get back to us.

Sadly I have a far more intimate knowledge of what went on in Hitler's Germany than you ever will, and I don't find it particularly relevant to any discussion of Darwin. We'll have to disagree on that.

You didn't dissuade me from anything.  I don't care what you think about how I post on this board.  But I think I've told you that before?     And thanks for the lecture on how "most people" post on getbig.com.    (That's five if you're still counting.     But feel free to continue to address me, rather than the substance of the thread. 

I'm not sure how you know I "barely skimmed the original passage," but you're wrong.  I read it and posted a comment.  This is a message board.  That's what people do. 

I have no idea what your experience with the Holocaust is and whether you have "far more intimate knowledge" about it than me.  Maybe you do, maybe you don't.  What difference does that make?  Certainly doesn't change my impression of Darwin's comments.  We will have to agree to disagree on whether Darwin's comments were consistent with Hitler's attempt to eliminate certain segments of the population.  Sounds that way to me.   

[Deedee]

You didn't dissuade me from anything.  I don't care what you think about how I post on this board.  But I think I've told you that before?     And thanks for the lecture on how "most people" post on getbig.com.    (That's five if you're still counting.     But feel free to continue to address me, rather than the substance of the thread. 

I'm not sure how you know I "barely skimmed the original passage," but you're wrong.  I read it and posted a comment.  This is a message board.  That's what people do. 

I have no idea what your experience with the Holocaust is and whether you have "far more intimate knowledge" about it than me.  Maybe you do, maybe you don't.  What difference does that make?  Certainly doesn't change my impression of Darwin's comments.  We will have to agree to disagree on whether Darwin's comments were consistent with Hitler's attempt to eliminate certain segments of the population.  Sounds that way to me.   

Is this like a confirmation post or something, where you basically reiterate everything I say?    I only addressed you because you addressed me first.

[Deedee]

Deedee, who is targeting the man himself?  Call it Darwin, Darwinism, Evolution as you said earlier.  Personally, I'm not here making stuff up and making false claims.  I'm just going by what I read and I am posting my references.  I do appreciate your participation.  Where did you get the above quote and who is it by?

Deedee, are you German? 

What do you think of these?

"Darwinism by itself did not produce the Holocaust, but without Darwinism, especially in its social Darwinist and eugenics permutations, neither Hitler nor his Nazi followers would have had the necessary scientific underpinnings to convince themselves and their collaborators that one of the world's greatest atrocities was really morally praiseworthy. Darwinism - or at least some naturalistic interpretation of darwinism - succeeded in turning morality on its head." 
Richard Weikart, From Darwin to Hitler, Evolutionary Ethics, Eugenics and Racism in Germany
 
"Hitler believed in struggle as a Darwinian principle of human life that forced every people to try to dominate all others; without struggle they would rot and perish … . Even in his own defeat in April 1945, Hitler expressed his faith in the survival of the stronger and declared the Slavic peoples to have proven themselves the stronger." 
Peter Hoffman, Hitler's Personal Security (Oxford, UK: Pergamon Press, 1979), p. 264.

"To see evolutionary measures and tribal morality being applied vigorously to the affairs of a great modern nation, we must turn again to Germany of 1942. We see Hitler devoutly convinced that evolution produces the only real basis for a national policy … . The means he adopted to secure the destiny of his race and people were organized slaughter, which has drenched Europe in blood … . Such conduct is highly immoral as measured by every scale of ethics, yet Germany justifies it; it is consonant with tribal or evolutionary morality. Germany has reverted to the tribal past, and is demonstrating to the world, in their naked ferocity, the methods of evolution."
Sir Arthur Keith, Evolution and Ethics (New York: Putman, 1947), p. 28.

"I assumed that Darwin's theory of evolution and "Social Darwinism" were substantially distinct, and that "Social Darwinism" was a twisting of Darwin's theory in a way that Darwin would not have approved. Then I read Charles Darwin's Descent of Man and realized that my simplistic dichotomy between Darwin and "Social Darwinism" could not be maintained."
Dr. John G. West, Darwin Day In America: How Our Politics and Culture Have Been Dehumanized in the Name of Science

Yes, I am Loco.  That's where the Lutheran part of Protestant comes in. To answer your earlier question, I never call myself Lutheran. Just Protestant, unless some additional qualification is needed, like here, in which case I use the awkward Lutheran Protestant. 

I appreciate what you've posted above, and there are many people who believe that Darwinism influenced Hitler.

But I still say there is far more to it than that.  Take a look at a Leni Riefenstahl film clip on youtube and you'll better see what Hitler's vision was.  The whole "we are the sun-god people" theme comes across in an almost otherworldly manner. She captured it perfectly with lighting and camera angles. Even though he was a failed artist, Hitler did have a creative imagination, (evident in over the top architecture, uniforms, pomp and PR, etc)  and he and his inner circle worshiped runes, met secretly to engage in mystical religious rituals... the whole nazi thing was imbued with magical symbolism, (the hackenkreuz),  ancient mythology (the valkyries), etc.  There was much more to his (eventual) demented vision than your simple, "we arouse out of the goo together but our people have emerged superior" ideal. He truly believed that the Germanic people were just short of godlike.   

I'll post a few Hitler myth links for you when it's less busy... and I'll leave it up to you if you want to read them or not. (For instance, Hitler believed in superior/inferior bloodlines. Bloodlines are biblical/religious, not evolutionist.  There's much more, if you're interested.)

I'm still not sure why promoting Hitler as having been influenced by Darwin is important to your thread.  It doesn't change the measure of the theory of evolution at all. 

Also, were you aware that Darwin was Christian himself and had a hard time reconciling his science with his faith?

[Butterbean]

 

Also, were you aware that Darwin was Christian himself and had a hard time reconciling his science with his faith?

Hi Deedles!     What is your definition of a Christian?  I ask this because some people don't agree on what "Christian" means.



Interesting thread!