captainwillies said:
now corret me if I'm wrong but when Darwin was first hypothisizing(is that a real word?) his theory of evolution he needed a trigger he needed an explaination for "why" things changed and for that he tasked to "the theory of natural selection" but what alot of people don't know is that Darwin's " theory of natural selection" was actually inspired by "Thomas Malthus" (a British scholar) who did alot of work on social economy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Robert_Malthus
so if you really want to make a "chain of blame", blame Malthus
Yes, but my intention wasn't really to make a chain of blame but rather to point out that while some parts or extrapolations upon a theory might be completely bonkers, they don't further to disprove the otherwise sound and logical theory as a whole.
This reasoning can even be applied to faith as well. The bible contain some pretty bonkers statements (written by people, not God), like that you should stone homosexuals to death, rape women of other ethnicities, kill, burn and maim people in general etc.
The parts telling people to be nice and forgiving towards other people, doesn't sound as bonkers and insane as the other stuff does, now does it?
In fact, I see the peaceloving aspects of the bible (and any written holy text for that matter as long as they have them) to be a pretty revolutionary way of thinking, considering the dark time periods where this was written. By our standards, the writers during these times lived under pretty savage conditions, and not always very far from complete barbarism where traits like ruthlessness and refusal to compromise would have been prevalent and probably successful traits in survival, they came up with a message of peace and civilised behaviour, and a message of afterthought. That's quite amazing when you think about it, and it just goes to show that existential thinking (no matter if you use a context based on faith in an unproven supreme being or not) does serve a good purpose for mankind in general.
The only thing us agnosticists and atheists can hope for and strive to accomplish is to appeal to these parts of religious peoples religions, instead of the parts that are completely bonkers.
And we secular people can at the same time try our best to focus on the parts of science and academia that are beneficial to mankind (like medicine to cure diseases, renewable power sources, space exploration, cheap food and water for those who doesn't have it, justice, equal rights etc.), and try to refrain from focusing on the completely bonkers parts that tend to creep into the realms of science and academics (like racism, eugenics, development of weapons of mass destruction etc.)
The important thing is, whether you want to pursue a path of faith or a path of science, make sure you stick to the good and beneficial parts of it rather than the bad ones, and do try to stop ridicule the other side and stop trying to sabotage the efforts or beliefs of that other side.
If we could all accept the fact that some people want to hold on to a belief in a higher being, and some people don't see the need for this for themselves, and also accept that while some studies of the scientific side, MIGHT not be completely okay with God (I stress the MIGHT-part here, because last time I checked God never explicitly said that abortions or stem-cell research was forbidden, this is an interpretation PEOPLE have made and nothing else), you just do your very best to stay away from it yourself, rather than actively trying to stop the other side from conducting these studies or convincing others that they should stay away from these things, but rather letting them make their own decisions about it. I think a pretty decent and pleasant compromise can be achieved.
But then again, what do I know. im just another faceless fuck on the internet. XD
captainwillies said:
Virtually all Englishmen in Darwin's time viewed blacks as culturally and intellectually inferior to Europeans. Some men of that time went so far as to say they were a different species. Charles Darwin was a product of his times and no doubt viewed non-Europeans as inferior in ways, but he was far more liberal than most: He vehemently opposed slavery (Darwin 1913, especially chap. 21), and he contributed to missionary work to better the condition of the native Tierra del Fuegans. He treated people of all races with compassion.
I would also like to say that there were quite a few creationists who were much more racist than Darwin. like Henry Morris of the Institute for Creation Research. In the past read racism into his interpretation of the Bible:
"Sometimes the Hamites, especially the Negroes, have even become actual slaves to the others. Possessed of a genetic character concerned mainly with mundane, practical matters, they have often eventually been displaced by the intellectual and philosophical acumen of the Japhethites and the religious zeal of the Semite"
Yes, but then again the bible do contain some bits about racism as well, and I wouldn't be surprised since racism (although maybe not the academic and bigot kind we are more familiar with today post WW2) was quite prevalent back then when the bible was written. It had to go in there at one point or another.
But like I said, let's separate the bonkers parts of any faith/science from the good parts and try to stay focused on the good parts. : )
captainwillies said:
yes i understand. its just that most of the religious people I know are really nice people. but damn there are some really strange people out there who have such a "deep" hate its like nothing I can comprehend. its almost like Darwin built a time machine travelled forward in time raped his mother infront of him, then jotted down all his beliefs, went back time and made theories that refutted them all!
what i want to know is why? no actually how? how do people become like that? its mind boggling to me
I don't know really. One theory might be that many religious people have interjected morality together with what the priest have been preaching at church. Couple that with the academic ridicule of pretty much all religious people, I guess that the religious people who have been taught since they were born about the grace of God, and their subjective morality and their minister have issues with people preforming abortions and stem-cell research everywhere around them along with the slandering and ridicule. This might make people a little... "grumpy" to say the least. : )
And since they view Darwin as the god of all that is atheism, and thereby connect him with the ridicule and disrespect and the ministers preachings of fire and brimstone and hell on earth, they might feel (even if they don't think it) that Darwin is sort of responsible for all this, and they take out all these bottled up frustrations (and christians can have a lot of those since they are still being told to turn the other cheek) on Darwin.
This might be where all the hate comes from. But that's just me guessing and trying to see their side of the argument, I don't have any proof for it. So any Christian who thinks I came close please, do speak up.
