ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2019 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Saturday, June 13, 2020

Canceling Darwin

It will be ironic if Charles Darwin is not ejected from his lofty status as a secular scientific saint by scientific and mathematical criticsm, but by the ignorant baying of the savage mob:
Up until now, Darwin has been considered something of a hero on the political left, due to the religious right’s opposition to the teaching of evolution in schools (or at least, their insistence that one should“teach the controversy” that supposedly surrounds evolution and creationism). However, it is quite possible there will soon be a reckoning. For Darwin’s writings contain ample statements that would put him far beyond the pale of what is now considered acceptable.

First, differences between the sexes. In The Descent of Man, Darwin states that “the average of mental power in man must be above that of woman.” And in an 1882 letter, he states that “women though generally superior to men to moral qualities are inferior intellectually,” and that “there seems to me to be a great difficulty from the laws of inheritance… in their becoming the intellectual equals of man.” He also observes in The Descent of Man that “the male sex is more variable in structure than the female.” This observation has since become known as the greater male variability hypothesis, and has been applied to a variety of human traits including, mostcontroversially, intelligence.

Second, differences between the races. Referring to some natives he encountered in South America during the voyage of the Beagle, Darwin observes, “one can hardly make oneself believe that they are fellow creatures.” He dedicates a whole chapter of The Descent of Man, to his study of “the races of man.” In that chapter he states, “There is, however, no doubt that the various races, when carefully compared and measured, differ much from each other… Their mental characteristics are likewise very distinct; chiefly as it would appear in their emotional, but partly in their intellectual faculties.” And in an earlier chapter of the book, he contrasts the “civilised races of man” with “the savage races,” noting that the former will “almost certainly exterminate, and replace” the latter.

Third, eugenics. In The Descent of Man, Darwin states, “We civilised men, on the other hand, do our utmost to check the process of elimination… Thus the weak members of civilised societies propagate their kind.” He then observes, “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 any one is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed.” However, he also notes, “Nor could we check our sympathy, even at the urging of hard reason, without deterioration in the noblest part of our nature… We must therefore bear the undoubtedly bad effects of the weak surviving and propagating their kind.”
If they're going after Churchill, they certainly won't give St. Darwin a pass. These barbarians don't care about history and they care even less about scientific history.

Labels: , ,

40 Comments:

Blogger Joe June 13, 2020 7:16 AM  

I love telling high schoolers to google the full name of Darwin's "The Origin of Species."

Blogger Pipeman June 13, 2020 7:54 AM  

When I taught in high school’s International Baccalaureate Diploma program ( these were the highest level students), I would show them the logical inescapability of Social Darwinism, if they signed on to evolution. Always a fun discussion!

Blogger Damelon Brinn June 13, 2020 7:55 AM  

“women though generally superior to men to moral qualities are inferior intellectually,”

It's interesting that, 140 years ago, it was already becoming accepted that women are more moral than men. And now they've changed it to: women are morally and intellectually superior to men, and physically equal too as long as the standards are "fair" to them. Progress!

Maybe they'll invent a woman who was Darwin's assistant or colleague, and gradually rewrite history to attribute the bits they like to her, and burn him along with the rest.

Blogger Doktor Jeep June 13, 2020 7:58 AM  

As it could be said: I didn't know Darwin was so based.

Blogger The Observer June 13, 2020 8:19 AM  

It's interesting that, 140 years ago, it was already becoming accepted that women are more moral than men. And now they've changed it to: women are morally and intellectually superior to men, and physically equal too as long as the standards are "fair" to them. Progress!

Meanwhile, the Bible lays it clear that women are the weaker vessel.

Maybe they'll invent a woman who was Darwin's assistant or colleague, and gradually rewrite history to attribute the bits they like to her, and burn him along with the rest.

It's a standard play that's been going on for a long while, longer than most people imagine. Everything from Pierre Curie to Charles Babbage to Shakespeare to Albert Einstein, they've tried the "it was really his wife/female assistant who did the work!" Sometimes it worked, sometimes it didn't.

Blogger Nihil Dicit June 13, 2020 8:20 AM  

Maybe they'll invent a woman who was Darwin's assistant or colleague, and gradually rewrite history to attribute the bits they like to her, and burn him along with the rest.

More likely a sub-Saharan Africa woman who figured it all out centuries before but Darwin found it and stole it (she also invented writing in Africa, but whitey erased it). It'll be the greatest movie nobody will bother to see.

Blogger Mr.MantraMan June 13, 2020 8:45 AM  

Since the left has the minds and ethics of teenaged white girls at best they are oppositional to the uncool such as us at the moment. So if we embraced "Based" Darwin his bones would be dug up and thrown in the ocean and some cannibal's statue dedicated to equality would take the place of Darwins.

Blogger dadofhomeschoolers June 13, 2020 8:52 AM  

"If Darwin is right, racism is not wrong."
Seen on a sign in front of a church. Right before someone took a bat to the sign.

Blogger Newscaper312 June 13, 2020 9:48 AM  

Jeep,
FWIW, the non politicized evolutionists who specialize in human behavior (NOT the cultural anthropologists) frequently end up backing up some traditional views of human nature: particulary sex roles and differences, an imperfect monogamy as the norm, and the utility of the dreaded double standards when it comes to men and womens sexuality. Also the natural affinity for favoring both near and extended kin over far strangers, cooperation as a competitive strategy in a bigger sphere, general group differences, etc, etc. Its why I think its a mistake to dismiss their work out of hand even if you think a purely mechanistic natural selection view is woefully incomplete. Your usual left wing idiot pretends to understand and support Evolution just to posture against Christians, and its all BS because they act so terrified about anyone taking it seriously wrt human beings. They act as if humans alone are in a blank slate bubble.
Sure, in a purely secular view humans are just animals... But they are the *human* animal with their own human nature. I think both are from the 90s but I recommend Matt Ridleys The Red Queen and The Origins of Virtue for insight.

Blogger BalancedTryteOperators June 13, 2020 10:32 AM  

Social justice is a crime financed by the pain of the accused.

Blogger Silly but True June 13, 2020 10:59 AM  

If eugenicists evolved into cancellers, how did the first eugenicist originate?

Blogger Unknown June 13, 2020 11:02 AM  

I don't think they can "cancel" St. Darwin, since he is the anti-Paul The Apostle in their religion. It's easy to cancel Sir Winston, since he, in principle, stood for Christendom. Darwin, however, is indispensable for a religion which rejects Genesis 1:1. Whether a person or movement starts with "God created the heavens and the earth" determines whether it ends up with a civilization that affirms family, liberty,and respect for law and property, or ends up as Antifa and BLM barbarians.

Blogger pyrrhus June 13, 2020 11:09 AM  

Darwin was right about many things, chiefly because he believed that most human qualities were innate and heritable...For example, It took a century, but he was proven right about the universality of facial expressions...

Blogger Greg Hunt June 13, 2020 11:46 AM  

OT: I've been having trouble accessing news.Infogalactic this week due to the following error:
NET::ERR_CERT_AUTHORITY_INVALID

Blogger Gastguma June 13, 2020 12:04 PM  

There is a difference between direct observations of reality and the theoretical explanations of how this reality came about. It is with respect to the latter that evolutionists stumble by preferring ad hoc storytelling, unsupported by or even contrary to evidence. I wouldn't be surprised if the theory becomes even more divorced from reality as biologists will be increasingly encouraged to deny truthful observations that contradict the narrative in favor of telling stories that support it.

Blogger MJ June 13, 2020 12:10 PM  

"And in an earlier chapter of the book, he contrasts the “civilised races of man” with “the savage races,” noting that the former will “almost certainly exterminate, and replace” the latter."

Seems to be going the opposite way recently.

Blogger Robert Coble June 13, 2020 12:55 PM  

@3:

Hidden Figures II: The Crucial Contributions of Emma Wedgwood Darwin to "On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life"

The real brains behind the scientific theories of Charles Darwin, who was, like Margaret Sanger, an ardent advocate for a "ScienceTM" based program to improve the human race by eliminating the intellectually and emotionally inferior races. It was simply her misfortune to have to spend considerable time in a repressive gender role, birthing 10 babies in her own valiant efforts to stem the rising tide of inferior people by out breeding them. Her many contributions to evolving "ScienceTM" have been largely overlooked because of racist white people in control of society. She remains just another woman hidden in the shadows of the patriarchy, up until this courageous correction of the outrages committed against all women.

"We're looking at YOU, evil white people!"

Blogger Martel June 13, 2020 1:25 PM  

@12 Darwin is propaganda for higher IQ people. For everybody else "turtles all the way down" will do.

Blogger Avalanche June 13, 2020 2:04 PM  

@3 "Maybe they'll invent a woman who was Darwin's assistant or colleague,"

You left out a word...

Maybe they'll invent a BLACK woman who was Darwin's assistant or colleague,

Blogger Nihil Dicit June 13, 2020 2:05 PM  

They act as if humans alone are in a blank slate bubble.

That's because what they really believe in is Lysenkoism, the perfectibility of man through the proper application of Marxism.

Blogger Shimshon June 13, 2020 3:00 PM  

If Shakespeare can be black, so can Darwin. Problem solved.

Blogger eclecticmn June 13, 2020 3:45 PM  

Long ago I took a course, Literature and Ideas, limited to ideas like evolution, communism and how literature related. Not a bad course. It introduced me to Arthur Koestler, André Malraux, and others. We had to give a short talk. I gave mine on Communism and racism just to watch the class squirm.

It turns out that many of these Darwin ideas on race were picked up and repeated by Marx or just originated with Marx. I loved to quote Marx on the subhuman nature of blacks. How long until the modern 'Marxists' turn on Marx?

Blogger Gettimothy June 13, 2020 3:55 PM  

"How long until the modern 'Marxists' turn on Marx?"

Be a shame if BLM toppled his statues, defaced painings if him abd dtarted burning down anthro (rhymes with afro) pology departments.

Blogger eclecticmn June 13, 2020 4:00 PM  

Even the leftists/whatever are right every now and then.
I read the book The Double Helix by James Watson long ago. Even reading just his account I thought that they screwed over Rosalind as I read the text. Watson later spoke wrongthink about blacks and was stripped of some titles.

This 'diversity' obsession will back fire as intelligent young people will assume that any famous non straight white male is an affirmative action candidate. If I were young I would assume that Alan Turin is lauded only because he was a fag. Nothing could be further from the truth.



Blogger CM June 13, 2020 4:08 PM  

Darwin was just a tool to tear down Christianity. He's part of the deconstruction in Vigano's Baphomet reference.

Christianity is on the ropes in this country. Darwin has outlived his usefulness and it's time to rebuild that "all men are created equal" not to mean "in God's image" but something lesser, based, and perverse.

It's just another brick in the rebuilding of Babel to the glory of humanity.

Blogger CM June 13, 2020 4:14 PM  

It's interesting that, 140 years ago, it was already becoming accepted that women are more moral than men. And now they've changed it to: women are morally and intellectually superior to men, and physically equal too as long as the standards are "fair" to them. Progress!

Most ancient cultures and religions elevated women to positions of authority in (at the least) passing on of moral teaching.

I can't see how that's not accurate. Women seem to effect undue influence on what is considered moral and right in a society.

Christianity was right to place boundaries on that, else she let her emotions guide their civilization to disaster.

Christianity still gives women the authority of teaching women and children, but what they teach is bounded by a male led household and church.

Blogger Haxo Angmark June 13, 2020 4:45 PM  

yes, the Reds are destroying a lot of stuff that

we also need destroyed. Let the cities

and the urbanites

burn.

Blogger JG June 13, 2020 6:30 PM  

My wife's relatives in China watch the riots here and think they see the same events as during China's cultural revolution. The revolution was principally against the "four olds", old customs, culture, habits, and ideas.

History doesn't repeat, but sometimes it rhymes.

Blogger Samuel Adams June 13, 2020 6:31 PM  

It's inevitable. Darwin will be expunged from history as effectively as Francis Galton has been. Darwin's "contribution" to science was only postulative, expecting the fossil record and further research to vindicate him. The last 160 years have proven him incredibly wrong. Galton, a brilliant polymath, on the other hand was a credible and prolific scientist whose contributions measurably contributed to the body of human knowledge, but his great offense was recognizing racial differences by measuring and quantifying them.

Blogger Zeroh Tollrants June 13, 2020 6:32 PM  

Women are not morally superior to men. We never have been. Women are better at following societal signaling of their virtue, that doesn't mean we possess it.
Women were also the best Nazis and the best Communists, because of the minute, petty censoring and intense rule following they pressed into others.
There's a big difference between being moral and appearing moral.
As for more intelligent or more physically strong, only brainwashed believe that. It should be scoffed at every time you hear someone say it.

Blogger Zeroh Tollrants June 13, 2020 6:38 PM  

Because it is NOT true.

Blogger MichaelJMaier June 13, 2020 7:31 PM  

Bravo, Zeroh! Bravo.


“women though generally superior to men to moral qualities are inferior intellectually,”

HA! He omitted "when kept firmly in check by men".

Blogger tublecane June 13, 2020 7:55 PM  

"due to the religious right's opposition to teaching evolution in schools"

I see this is a learnèd man, with a firm grasp on history past a few seconds ago.

There isn't any long and complicated impact of Darwinism on politics. It's just Inherit the Wind.

Blogger Joe Smith June 13, 2020 9:29 PM  

Even the first sentence of the quote is a lie.

"Up until now, Darwin has been considered something of a hero on the political left, due to the religious right’s opposition to the teaching of evolution in schools..."

Or... maybe this liar could tell the truth and write, "because Darwinism is one of the founding elements of the entire worldview of the political left." All sociologists should be canceled.

Blogger Timmy3 June 13, 2020 10:35 PM  

At least half the USA is destroying itself.

Blogger tublecane June 13, 2020 11:11 PM  

@34- I was caustic above, but I give a modicum of benefit of the doubt to this gentlemen. Because somewhere in the early 20th century the Boazians took the history of sociology by the throat and never let go. Which taints all understanding of the first century of Darwinism.

Unless, ya know, you do your own research. But who has time for that? Besides curious losers like me.

It is their thesis that "Social Darwinists" were all Lazy Fairies in the manner of Herbert Spencer. In fact, the majority of those applying Darwinism to human society (as Darwin himself did), came out on the collectivist rather than individualistic side. (Forgive the reductionist binarism.) That is, on the socialistic side.

Some of these emphasized race, and the Nazis ruined that for the rest of us.

Blogger Reprehensible Adam June 14, 2020 2:56 AM  

These satanic super soldiers want to get the image of the beast up. Common be tolerant it’s liberal.

Blogger FrankNorman June 14, 2020 5:57 AM  

Read any of Charles Darwin's essays or letters, and you may notice that he was an eloquent author, and that his works are bad science, but good literature.

From the point of view of some modern-day "skim until offended" SJW, this might be offensive in and of itself. They don't need to even understand what Darwin was saying to be offended by it, the long and beautiful sentences will themselves offend them.
It represents a form of superiority. Darwin, as a Victorian-era English author, was naturally superior to people like themselves.
And he knew it.
And they themselves know it.
And that is why they are angry.

Blogger Emmanuel June 14, 2020 1:15 PM  

Honestly, I hope the blacks beat down Darwin. Would be poetic irony on so many levels and have the atheist and agnostic fags who worship him go crazy from the mental dissonance.

Blogger JG June 14, 2020 9:56 PM  

Genetics, math, and logic already demolished Darwin's Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection. The left is late to the game.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts