10 Oct 05
Originally posted by RatXAttributing these people's actions on Christianity is as unfair as blaming the actions of Hitler, the eugenicists etc on the TOE. That's all.
Their actions were entirely contradictory to Christian teaching -
This is beginning to sound like the old "Some Christians did some bad things, so despite the great good they've done to the world and humankind, their religion is racist, evil and stupid..."
10 Oct 05
Originally posted by Bosse de Nageverily, so it is written that RatX will in full circle come face to face with his own fallacious reasoning -- reeled in hook, line, and sinker. verily, Bosse, you have proven yourself worthy as a fisher of men.
Attributing these people's actions on Christianity is as unfair as blaming the actions of Hitler, the eugenicists etc on the TOE. That's all.
10 Oct 05
Originally posted by Bosse de NageOk, just a little dust in the wind - please show me that these people professed to be Christians at all. Hitler and those controlling eugenics based their arguments for their actions on TOE.
Attributing these people's actions on Christianity is as unfair as blaming the actions of Hitler, the eugenicists etc on the TOE. That's all.
As I noted, Christianity is opposed to such actions. Evolution is not (as eugenics is "controlled evolution"đ. You've tried, to no avail, argue that evolution has no stance on this matter, but I've shown the link between the theory and practice and now I wait for something more than smoke and mirrors when you show me why eugenics (just for a starter) is not perfectly justified within the context of TOE.
10 Oct 05
Originally posted by RatXThats a bit of a wide one given the record of the christian churches in terms og general racism, apologism for slavery, anti-semitism in particular and the role of protestant churches in the US and RSA supporting segregation and apartheid.
Ok, let's get spiritual...
Christianity condemns racism (love one another, love your neighbour as yourself, what you do to the least in your eyes you have done to Me, etc and so forth).
However, evolution teaches that some creatures are less evolved than others and led to the misconception that some races are better than others. Hitler used this in his r ...[text shortened]... isagree) I am mentally healthy despite not being a racist. And I'm not quite a fundee either...
10 Oct 05
Originally posted by aardvarkhomeHope it's not too wide that it doesn't get by you... These Christian churches, despite their label, were not acting according to Christian teaching and doctrine. If you can show me that Christianity can incite racism, please do.
Thats a bit of a wide one given the record of the christian churches in terms og general racism, apologism for slavery, anti-semitism in particular and the role of protestant churches in the US and RSA supporting segregation and apartheid.
10 Oct 05
Originally posted by LemonJelloLet me rephrase my argument so that I can get something solid from you guys - not a bubble of hot gas as before...
verily, so it is written that RatX will in full circle come face to face with his own fallacious reasoning -- reeled in hook, line, and sinker. verily, Bosse, you have proven yourself worthy as a fisher of men.
On what grounds can an evolutionist condemn the eugenics program? It is "controlled evolution" in its essence.
As a Christian, I can condemn the racist and murderous actions of the mob who killed those unfortunate Jews (although Bosse still hasn't brought forward any backing to link this act with his "Christians killing Jews because they killed Jesus" post). Christian principle and teaching very clearly rejects racism and condemns it - referring to the earlier post supporting this statement.
I can also condemn the eugenics program on the same grounds and more (violation of human rights which are derived from Judeo-Christian teaching and ideology). However, I still need to find the grounds by which evolutionists can condemn the program. Please answer...
10 Oct 05
Originally posted by RatXjust as misinterpretations of christianity have been used to justifyu racist behaviour the same is true of scientific rationalism. It is the human condition rather than the ideas used to justify racism that is the problem
Hope it's not too wide that it doesn't get by you... These Christian churches, despite their label, were not acting according to Christian teaching and doctrine. If you can show me that Christianity can incite racism, please do.
10 Oct 05
Originally posted by RatXThe theory of gravity does not justify the dropping og bombs on innocvents, yet the bombs still fall. A scientific theory does nothing more than attempt to explain the physical world. The moral choice to condemn or support is the realm of philosophy or religion.
Let me rephrase my argument so that I can get something solid from you guys - not a bubble of hot gas as before...
On what grounds can an evolutionist condemn the eugenics program? It is "controlled evolution" in its essence.
As a Christian, I can condemn the racist and murderous actions of the mob who killed those unfortunate Jews (although Bosse stil ...[text shortened]... still need to find the grounds by which evolutionists can condemn the program. Please answer...
Let us respect these two separate endeavours of the human spirit: the scientists do not try to moralise, merely to describe and explain; perhaps the religious can respect their endeavours by offering relevant moral choices for the modern age made in the light of new knowlege. Instead, a small but vociferous minority (the fundies) are determined to deny the advances that science makes, obsessed with defending a folk legend from 5000 years ago as an absolute truth. What I don't understand is why the more reasonable (but obviously devout) christians on this bored don't try to rein the fundies in as they are discrediting the whole faith.
10 Oct 05
1 edit
Originally posted by RatXyou do not have an argument, Rat. you have merely a gathering in your head of misguided notions. Bosse and others have already explained it to you, so i am not sure why you still don't get it:
Let me rephrase my argument so that I can get something solid from you guys - not a bubble of hot gas as before...
On what grounds can an evolutionist condemn the eugenics program? It is "controlled evolution" in its essence.
As a Christian, I can condemn the racist and murderous actions of the mob who killed those unfortunate Jews (although Bosse stil ...[text shortened]... still need to find the grounds by which evolutionists can condemn the program. Please answer...
the theory of evolution imparts only descriptive "is" claims and makes no prescritpive or normative "ought" claims. you are saying that many people have used the TOE as sole grounds for morally justifying their deeds. however, if those people did that, then they committed the Is-Ought Fallacy, in as much as it is a fallacy to think that sufficient conditions for moral rightness or wrongness can be comprised solely of descriptive claims. in other words, those people committed the fallacy of arguing solely from "is" claims to an "ought" conclusion. therefore, even if you are right, dear Rat, you have succeeded only in showing that fallacious reasoning can at times be harmful, which is not much of a surprise. what certainly DOES NOT follow from anything you have said is that the TOE is false or invalid.
of course, what is also likely is that these evil people you speak of did not commit the fallacy mentioned above, and in going from "is" to an "ought" conclusion, they inserted their OWN INDEPENDENT "ought" premises, many of which are morally repugnant to many people, evolutionists included. then your beef is with the normative claims of these morally repugnant people and not with the TOE.
therefore, it follows that, collectively, your posts are truly and completely ineffectual as an "argument" against the validity of the descriptive claims comprising the TOE. rather, your discontent lies EITHER with the fallacious reasoning associated with the Is-Ought Fallacy OR with individual normative claims that you (and I also) find morally repugnant but which are completely separate from the TOE.
11 Oct 05
1 edit
Originally posted by aardvarkhomeHere is an article perverting Christianity to suit racist views:
just as misinterpretations of christianity have been used to justifyu racist behaviour the same is true of scientific rationalism. It is the human condition rather than the ideas used to justify racism that is the problem
http://www.heretical.com/mkilliam/biblrace.html
Here is one that uses the concept of "survival of the fittest" to justify certain attitudes towards Jews:
http://www.heretical.com/oliver/js04.html
Of course as a person sympathetic to both Christianity and science (though likely as not understanding little enough of both) it goes without saying that I accept the premises of these articles without question đ