Page 1 of 3
#1
So i was discussing this with a friend of mine for like a half an hour today... Social Darwinism

I know it was one of Hitlers policies etc... but when u think about it.. it makes perfect sense...... It happens naturally in nature.. its just humans have the emotional range capable of supporting pity........... Stalin 'pity is a disease of dogs'

Note: im not trying to build hitler or stalin up to be heroes or anything.. and im certainly not trying to say that most of what they did was right.... I just find it hard to find fault with this particular theory.....


Discuss.
#2
Except that we are naturally social animals. Social Darwinism is bullshit.
#4
I'm not sure i quite understand the theory itself
Quote by saxaxe
YESI love you.


Quote by Wulphy
Ever stuck their finger in their ass, just to see what it was like? I did


Quote by thewho65
My sister has a big ass
#6
Quote by Gregray88
I agree with you but really, where would we be if we followed that?


here
#7
Quote by IronNecrosis
I'm not sure i quite understand the theory itself


In a nutshell it argues that certain races are superior or certain types of people are superior

for example white germanic people are superior to black african people

or that people with mental problems should not be allowed to breed
Quote by RevaM1ssP1ss
Wiggy = legend.

Devil's Advocate
#8
Well, it depends on what you consider to be 'weak'. As humans, we are judgemental, and society gives us all different beliefs on who is superior.. Social darwinism would only work if there was an objective group of 'the fittest', no subjective.
Quote by Arthur Curry
it's official, vintage x metal is the saving grace of this board and/or the antichrist




e-married to
theguitarist
minterman22
tateandlyle
& alaskan_ninja

#9
By their own existance, the words weak and pity are made by human criteria...
no human has the right to extinguish the different so called "weak",
This is all Nietche(probably spelling it wrong) stuff about Zaratustra and the Super-human... although the guy didn't see it transforming into horror...
It is the basics of facism and racism... you should be really careful...
Every form of control over another person is a crime

AEK Athens
Asteras Exarcheion
Prasini Thyella
Rayo Vallecano

RED MILITIA-Vamos a Vencer
#10
Quote by vintage x metal
Social darwinism would only work if there was an objective group of 'the fittest', no subjective.


the zeitgeist determines that
#12
Quote by sappp
the zeitgeist determines that


Brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.............
Every form of control over another person is a crime

AEK Athens
Asteras Exarcheion
Prasini Thyella
Rayo Vallecano

RED MILITIA-Vamos a Vencer
#13
Quote by wiggy1988
In a nutshell it argues that certain races are superior or certain types of people are superior

for example white germanic people are superior to black african people

or that people with mental problems should not be allowed to breed

That's the gist of it, though Social Darwinism isn't necessarily racial. I believe it was Sir Francis Galton, a cousin of Charles Darwin, who criticized welfare for allowing "inferior" (i.e. poor) people to survive. Many social Darwinists believe that things like wealth/poverty and general successfulness can be attributed to an individual's social "fitness."

Personally, I don't like the idea as a whole, since so much of our development is circumstantial and dependent on our environments. Galton believed that almost all of our actions and behavior are determined by genetics, which was likely a foundation for his ideas, but most psychologists would dismiss that belief in a heartbeat.
#15
Quote by Walter98
You need stupid people to feel yourself smarter



I see what you did thar.
Quote by MakinLattes
dwelling on past mishaps is for the weak. you must stride into the future, unabashed and prepared to fuck up yet again.
#16
whenever anyone mentions social darwinism everyone tends to think

OMG HITLER OMGOMGOMG ****YOU IM NOT LISTENING TO THIS

but hitler actually had quite a few good ideas... ones that didn't involve killing the jews...

i think a lot of his general ideas were quite correct, it's just unfortunate that he was so goddamn racist and obsessed with people with blue eyes and blonde hair...

its one of the reasons that idealists shouldn't be given real political power.
Rock is Dead.

Gear:
Epiphone LPC
Vox AD50VT

Whats the meanest you can be,
To the ones you claim to love,
And still smile to your newfound friends?
#18
Quote by ghettohobbit4
whenever anyone mentions social darwinism everyone tends to think

OMG HITLER OMGOMGOMG ****YOU IM NOT LISTENING TO THIS

but hitler actually had quite a few good ideas... ones that didn't involve killing the jews...

i think a lot of his general ideas were quite correct, it's just unfortunate that he was so goddamn racist and obsessed with people with blue eyes and blonde hair...

its one of the reasons that idealists shouldn't be given real political power.

Hitler had awful ideas.

Do you know anything about him? In a serious way? Mein Kampft is just bullshit lead after more bullshit. It's inconsistent and everything it provided was lead with importance of racial arguments, which is just stupid. I'd love to hear from you what his good ideas were.
#19
Quote by ghettohobbit4
whenever anyone mentions social darwinism everyone tends to think

OMG HITLER OMGOMGOMG ****YOU IM NOT LISTENING TO THIS

but hitler actually had quite a few good ideas... ones that didn't involve killing the jews...

i think a lot of his general ideas were quite correct, it's just unfortunate that he was so goddamn racist and obsessed with people with blue eyes and blonde hair...

its one of the reasons that idealists shouldn't be given real political power.

Social Darwinism is also applied in economics though. Rockafeller and Carnegie preached it as their key to success, and it's often used to justify monoploies and the like
Quote by Arthur Curry
it's official, vintage x metal is the saving grace of this board and/or the antichrist




e-married to
theguitarist
minterman22
tateandlyle
& alaskan_ninja

#20
social Darwinism is the idea that people are born as superior or inferior


it is bollocks, if it was true then the Nazis would have beaten the USSR

so yea, its a load of royal wank, proved wrong many times,


Christian doctrine tells us all men are born equal and since it is Christian doctrine that has conquered this world (in the form of the British empire or other wise) social Darwinism is the idea of idiots
#21
Quote by Quintessence153
That's the gist of it, though Social Darwinism isn't necessarily racial. I believe it was Sir Francis Galton, a cousin of Charles Darwin, who criticized welfare for allowing "inferior" (i.e. poor) people to survive. Many social Darwinists believe that things like wealth/poverty and general successfulness can be attributed to an individual's social "fitness."

Personally, I don't like the idea as a whole, since so much of our development is circumstantial and dependent on our environments. Galton believed that almost all of our actions and behavior are determined by genetics, which was likely a foundation for his ideas, but most psychologists would dismiss that belief in a heartbeat.

Bingo!

Ohh, the idea of the most superior Race being Ayran actually came from a British man (name escapes me), not Hitler.
#22
Quote by wiggy1988
In a nutshell it argues that certain races are superior or certain types of people are superior

for example white germanic people are superior to black african people

or that people with mental problems should not be allowed to breed


uhhh no.... not really... well, not in a modern sense anyway.

what today's social darwinism argues is that certain people are better at certain things, and certain people are worse at certain things.

ex: a wealthy businessman's son is probably going to be a lot more likely to be successful than somone who's parent's were lazy, homeless, never worked a day in their lives.

so in a hunter-gatherer sense all the lazy people would eventually kill themselves off, but in a modern world this wouldn't happen because of things like as food stamps...

and one of hitler's principles was that we can make the world better by artifically taking nature's course and killing the people who were lazy, unproductive, bad workers etc...

and i'm about to be flamed....
Rock is Dead.

Gear:
Epiphone LPC
Vox AD50VT

Whats the meanest you can be,
To the ones you claim to love,
And still smile to your newfound friends?
#23
Quote by ghettohobbit4
uhhh no.... not really... well, not in a modern sense anyway.

what today's social darwinism argues is that certain people are better at certain things, and certain people are worse at certain things.

ex: a wealthy businessman's son is probably going to be a lot more likely to be successful than somone who's parent's were lazy, homeless, never worked a day in their lives.

so in a hunter-gatherer sense all the lazy people would eventually kill themselves off, but in a modern world this wouldn't happen because of things like as food stamps...

and one of hitler's principles was that we can make the world better by artifically taking nature's course and killing the people who were lazy, unproductive, bad workers etc...

and i'm about to be flamed....

Damn right. Give me some names of people who believe in this 'modern social Darwinism'. I'm curious.

How can survival of the fittest be implied into a society where everyone is expected to live into long age with offspring? It contradicts the point of survival of the fittest.
#24
Quote by ghettohobbit4
uhhh no.... not really... well, not in a modern sense anyway.

what today's social darwinism argues is that certain people are better at certain things, and certain people are worse at certain things.

ex: a wealthy businessman's son is probably going to be a lot more likely to be successful than somone who's parent's were lazy, homeless, never worked a day in their lives.

so in a hunter-gatherer sense all the lazy people would eventually kill themselves off, but in a modern world this wouldn't happen because of things like as food stamps...

and one of hitler's principles was that we can make the world better by artifically taking nature's course and killing the people who were lazy, unproductive, bad workers etc...

and i'm about to be flamed....



yea you are cos your a wanker,


who is born with attributes, my dad was a carpenter, and his dad but im it at that stuff, so genetics has nothing to do with anythin but physical attributes


god is stab you if you were here

and it aint the lager talkin i jus would
#25
Quote by imthehitcher
yea you are cos your a wanker,


who is born with attributes, my dad was a carpenter, and his dad but im it at that stuff, so genetics has nothing to do with anythin but physical attributes


god is stab you if you were here

and it aint the lager talkin i jus would

Read my blog and comments. It's the philosophical equivalent of that argument. It's not true.
#26
Quote by Craigo
Read my blog and comments. It's the philosophical equivalent of that argument. It's not true.



there is always an argument about "nature versus nurture"

all i can say is, how wa stheUSSR able to be such a power if they were "inferior"

ybj i dunoo what your chatting, spell it out for me (not that im stupid just tired + drunk)
#27
Quote by imthehitcher
there is always an argument about "nature versus nurture"

all i can say is, how wa stheUSSR able to be such a power if they were "inferior"

ybj i dunoo what your chatting, spell it out for me (not that im stupid just tired + drunk)

#28
Quote by Craigo
Damn right. Give me some names of people who believe in this 'modern social Darwinism'. I'm curious.

How can survival of the fittest be implied into a society where everyone is expected to live into long age with offspring? It contradicts the point of survival of the fittest.


social darwinism IS survival of the fittest, except in an urban setting rather than in the jungle.

the only real difference is that in an urban setting human evolution is a bit delayed...

(and please understand, i don't really like this concept because if it were implimented, myself and most of my friends and family wouldn't survive it. i don't have good genes... but just because i don't like it or it doesn't support my personal manifest destiny doesn't make it untrue.)
Rock is Dead.

Gear:
Epiphone LPC
Vox AD50VT

Whats the meanest you can be,
To the ones you claim to love,
And still smile to your newfound friends?
#29
Quote by Craigo



i was aksing if you trually believe in the bollocks that is born supremacy, not to be confused with Bourne supremacy , there is no need to be a wanker about it

simply put social darwinism fails because ut us totally wrong, just as Eugenics is wrong


it has been disproved


as have you, aristocracy fails, as do you

my birth does not define me, i choose my own path, i am not genetically predisposed to anything these ideas are the foundations of racism and evil

all men are born equal
#30
Quote by imthehitcher
yea you are cos your a wanker,


who is born with attributes, my dad was a carpenter, and his dad but im it at that stuff, so genetics has nothing to do with anythin but physical attributes


god is stab you if you were here

and it aint the lager talkin i jus would


*sigh... please calm down people...

k

do you ever watch those things about identical twins seperated at birth?

in most cases, once they're reunited they find out how many things they have in common.

don't get me wrong, you're not stuck with who you were born with, anyone is capable of changing themselves if they want to.

and nurture is a very, very large part of it.

but it's unquestionable that genetics also play a role.

Quote by imthehitcher
i was aksing if you trually believe in the bollocks that is born supremacy, not to be confused with Bourne supremacy , there is no need to be a wanker about it

simply put social darwinism fails because ut us totally wrong, just as Eugenics is wrong


it has been disproved


as have you, aristocracy fails, as do you

my birth does not define me, i choose my own path, i am not genetically predisposed to anything these ideas are the foundations of racism and evil

all men are born equal


i really wish that were true... but its not...
Rock is Dead.

Gear:
Epiphone LPC
Vox AD50VT

Whats the meanest you can be,
To the ones you claim to love,
And still smile to your newfound friends?
Last edited by ghettohobbit4 at May 23, 2008,
#31
Quote by imthehitcher


all men are born equal


So, at birth, you had the same probability of becoming wealthy as, say, Prince Harry?
#32
Quote by skagitup
So, at birth, you had the same probability of becoming wealthy as, say, Prince Harry?



as a man am i less than prince harry?

no, he is inbred, the product of sheltered upbringing

his wealth is inherited, mine will be earned

all i can say is Roman Abramovicj was orphaned at 3 years old and is richer than the queen
#33
Quote by imthehitcher
as a man am i less than prince harry?

no, he is inbred, the product of sheltered upbringing

his wealth is inherited, mine will be earned

all i can say is Roman Abramovicj was orphaned at 3 years old and is richer than the queen


Well, of course if you're going to start twisting your definitions of being a success then i'm sure you can wander through hundreds of examples, but you'd be stupid to believe that all men really are born equal.

There are kids being born in the third world that already carry HIV or whatever, with little or no chance of getting an education etc. etc. etc. Can you really take one of those, compare him to Prince Harry at birth and really say that all men are born equal?
#34
Quote by skagitup
Well, of course if you're going to start twisting your definitions of being a success then i'm sure you can wander through hundreds of examples, but you'd be stupid to believe that all men really are born equal.

There are kids being born in the third world that already carry HIV or whatever, with little or no chance of getting an education etc. etc. etc. Can you really take one of those, compare him to Prince Harry at birth and really say that all men are equal?



well education is a product of their environment, they are not born with an education or not, Jesus id slap you if you were here


HIV is a disease it means they will pass it on to others, it doenst mean taht they will be physically weaker than than Hary or stupider


i was not born smarter than you, but in my time on this earth i have obviously absorbed more knowledge

since you believe someone is born with an education or not
#35
Quote by imthehitcher
well education is a product of their environment, they are not born with an education or not, Jesus id slap you if you were here


HIV is a disease it means they will pass it on to others, it doenst mean taht they will be physically weaker than than Hary or stupider


i was not born smarter than you, but in my time on this earth i have obviously absorbed more knowledge

since you believe someone is born with an education or not


Once again you're just twisting your argument to support my examples. If education is a product of their enviroment, and they were born in an enviroment that is potentially less beneficial for them than your enviroment, then they were not born equal to you, were they?

They were born with HIV, Prince Harry wasn't. That isn't equal.

And, if you're going to argue that intelligence isn't at least partially inherited then your parents obviously weren't the brightest of the bunch. I'm sure there's statistical data somewhere that clearly shows correlation between smart parents and smart children or whatever. It's just obvious. My best friend was in bottom sets at school, I was in top sets. His mum was in bottom sets, my mum was in top sets, yet we grew up both with childminders most of the time, in the same classes at school both pretty much spending all of our early lives together. I myself am a perfect example that intelligence is at least partially inherited.

I'm tired, but you appear to have no room in your mind for anything other than absolutes. Only a Sith deals in absolutes. Sure, some kids born in worse situations can turn out better, but in terms of probability, a kid in the UK is always going to have better chances than one in the third world, therefore, every man is not born equal.
#36
Quote by skagitup
Once again you're just twisting your argument to support my examples. If education is a product of their enviroment, and they were born in an enviroment that is potentially less beneficial for them than your enviroment, then they were not born equal to you, were they?

They were born with HIV, Prince Harry wasn't. That isn't equal.

And, if you're going to argue that intelligence isn't at least partially inherited then your parents obviously weren't the brightest of the bunch. I'm sure there's statistical data somewhere that clearly shows correlation between smart parents and smart children or whatever. It's just obvious. My best friend was in bottom sets at school, I was in top sets. His mum was in bottom sets, my mum was in top sets, yet we grew up both with childminders both of the time, in the same classes at school both pretty much spending all of our early lives together. I myself am a perfect example that intelligence is at least partially inherited.

I'm tired, but you appear to have no room in your mind for anything other than absolutes. Only a Sith deals in absolutes. Sure, some kids born in worse situations can turn out better, but in terms of probability, a kid in the UK is always going to have better chances than one in the third world, therefore, every man is not born equal.



parnet pass on intelligence through educating kids rather than genetically therefore your argument falls through

also education is a social consequense, Britian made hundreds of nations poor, as have USA, France, Germany ETC thereforethey can not afford education

how come i am going to a better uni then every one i know who went to the public (£6000 pounds a year) school down the road, whereas i went to a catholic school as the product of working class family
#37
Quote by skagitup
And, if you're going to argue that intelligence isn't at least partially inherited then your parents obviously weren't the brightest of the bunch. I'm sure there's statistical data somewhere that clearly shows correlation between smart parents and smart children or whatever. It's just obvious.

There is statistical data to suggest that intelligence is partially inherited. I could dig up my psychology textbook and cite some studies if you like.

I'll say this about the "born equal" argument: All men are born with potential of some kind or another (albeit I wouldn't say all potential is equal), but not all men are born into equal circumstances to develop that potential.

EDIT: I looked through my book and found some twin studies and adoption studies that suggest genetic influence in intelligence: Turkheimer, 1991; McGue, 1993; Bouchard, 1998; Plomin & Spinath, 2004
Last edited by Quintessence153 at May 23, 2008,
#38
Quote by imthehitcher
parnet pass on intelligence through educating kids rather than genetically therefore your argument falls through

also education is a social consequense, Britian made hundreds of nations poor, as have USA, France, Germany ETC thereforethey can not afford education

how come i am going to a better uni then every one i know who went to the public (£6000 pounds a year) school down the road, whereas i went to a catholic school as the product of working class family


God, it's like talking to a brick wall.

Firstly, i'm sorry but intelligence is passed on genetically. I can't be bothered to give any more examples because you'll just tiptoe around them and miss the point entirely like before.

Your final point, about you going to a better uni than the public school boys, is a joke. It actually proves my point more so than it does yours. If intelligence is passed on through "educating kids" and you went to a lesser school then surely the only explanation is a natural gift, that of genetic explanation - looks like you weren't born equal to those public school boys after all.

I'm going to bed. Continue to deal in absolutes, Sith Lord.
#39
Quote by Quintessence153
There is statistical data to suggest that intelligence is partially inherited. I could dig up my psychology textbook and cite some studies if you like.

I'll say this about the "born equal" argument: All men are born with potential of some kind or another (albeit I wouldn't say all potential is equal), but not all men are born into equal circumstances to develop that potential.



yea okay thats a fairer assesment

that all men have different potential, but circumstance do not allow everyone to achieve theres

i submit to you that the majority have similar potential to do anything (ofcourse osmetimes disease etc makes some impossible as in a disabled person would have no chance of being a footballer etc. )


God, it's like talking to a brick wall.



your a prick, my achievements are throufh hard work instead of genetic pre disposition

your are suggestin that races would be inferior

and therefore are a racist

b your logic whites were able to colonise africa because they were born as better than the black people


god you didnt even construct an argument
Last edited by imthehitcher at May 23, 2008,
#40
Quote by imthehitcher


your a prick, my achievements are throufh hard work instead of genetic pre disposition

your are suggestin that races would be inferior

and therefore are a racist

b your logic whites were able to colonise africa because they were born as better than the black people


god you didnt even construct an argument


Ever considered that perhaps your passion for hard-work was inherited?



So I'm a racist because I dispute the fact that all men are born equal? That's quite a jump to make. You presume that because I'm arguing that all men aren't born equal, I believe that that's the way it should be. The flaw in that is quite evident. Can you see it? I'll give you a second to see you if you can spot it, you don't appear to be too quick.

...

Not got it yet? I'll give you an example. If I were to say "People in third world countries are starving", that doesn't mean that I want those people to starve, it just means that it's what's happening.

As for you saying that I believe whites colonised africa because they were born as better... well, I'm speachless. Have you just ignored entirely what I've been saying for the last 10 minutes? The integral part of my argument was exactly what you just agreed with a second ago, the fact that the enviroment that people are born into prevents some people from capitalising upon their own stregnths and thus disputes the "every men is born equal" idea.

I can't even be bothered any more. You really need to learn how to understand people and construct points accordingly, instead of just recycling your views over and over despite the tragic truth that they are all painfully distorted.

Goodnight.
Page 1 of 3