Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Evolution -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Brumar89 who wrote (3826)	4/23/2010 11:48:02 AM
From: Solon	2 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 69300

"Marxism, Nazism, eugenics, racial science ... they were all scientific advances" Marxism and Nazism were political movements--nothing to do with philosophy. Hitler got some of his ideas from this book: humanitas-international.org As to eugenics, it is a social philosophy rather than a science. This is a decent article on what have been termed positive and negative eugenics. eugenicsarchive.org As to racial science, it was a legitimate inquiry as to how race corresponds to genetics. And it is certainly useful in current research as it allows medicine to better treat disease and illness across groups of people. We know it was used for wrong reasons as well by people such as Hitler starting with erroneous premises (and an utter disregard for humanity) and seeking solutions to human "inferiority". However, this is not a science even though he undoubtedly used "scientists" to experiment. His use of the centuries old warfare between Christianity and the Jews coupled with his attempt to give his murderous intents "authenticity" through "science" are the scourge of the 20th century--perhaps of all centuries--but it is unfair to implicate science as a moral or immoral lever. Scientists can be individually reprehensible as much as doctors, lawyers, or you and I--but science itself is simply a method of understanding the nature of things. "Honor thy father and the mother. You shall not murder. You shall not commit adultery. You shall not steal. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor. You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, or male or female slave, or ox, or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor. ...... Matthew 22:36-40 (New International Version) 36"Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?" 37Jesus replied: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.'[a] 38This is the first and greatest commandment. 39And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' 40All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments." --------------- So now faith, hope, and love abide, these three; but the greatest of these is love. 1 Corinthians 13:13 ---------------- I could go on but really have the atheists or the scientists of the world offered better guidelines?" ________________________________________________ I don't think so. I think you pretty much covered what I was referring to. Go much farther and it will be scapegoats wandering in the desert, casting out demons, cursing fig trees for not bearing figs out of season, or making a wife drink filthy offal off the slaughterhouse floor to test her fidelity or curing leprosy by killing birds and spreading their blood on your ear and big toes and on and on. No...I suggest you have pretty much covered exactly what I said. Thank you. By the way: all these moral dictums originated other than in the Jewish or Christian bibles. All cultures (some thousands of years prior to christian mythology) had similar values for promoting civilized interrelationship (leaving out, of course, the castration, the hating your parents, the making war instead of peace with your brother and that sort of moral rot).