• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Does Darwinism lead to bigotry?

Somerville said:
I truly do not understand what you are trying to say about my posts. shall I simplify for you.

Wagner wrote of his anti-Semitic feelings BEFORE Darwin published on the subject of evolution.

The fact that he continued to write and have published similar screeds after 1859, does not negate the fact that he first stated his beliefs BEFORE Darwin published.

"being a wikipedia entry" one should look at some of the references provided, that's what the numbers in the brackets are indicating.
Click to expand...

Wayno said:
LOL.......

If you don't know what the eugenics movement is, and the fact that it was AMERICAN PROGRESSIVES that were the motivating force behind it, the ignorant one would be you.....

Try and keep up.

You might begin by using the link I provided.

You can educate yourself beyond that on your own.
Click to expand...

Somer -

I bet he uses the same few sources / arguments so here: Wayno's "argument(s)" They just kinda start there. :cheers:
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
I looked briefly online and didn't see anything that was easily accessible or that seemed like what I would consider a legitimate source.
Click to expand...

Well that certainly doesn't mean they don't exist, but it becomes increasingly unlikely. I'd recommend not trying to link the two.

Again, the Op's argument would be stupid regardless of what Wagner based his arguments on. Because Wagner would be misapplying the actual science. It's like critiquing Quantum mechanics because the shucksters on the secret used it
Click to expand...

But ignorance is still ignorant and, as annoying as it may be, ignorance can influence. (i.e. those dumb chain emails)
 
zgoldsmith23 said:
Well that certainly doesn't mean they don't exist, but it becomes increasingly unlikely. I'd recommend not trying to link the two.
Click to expand...

I'm not trying to link the two. It's what I recall reading in numerous academic texts, when covering the assimilated jews of Europe and their failure to integrate into larger European society



zgoldsmith23 said:
But ignorance is still ignorant and, as annoying as it may be, ignorance can influence. (i.e. those dumb chain emails)
Click to expand...

Sorry, information not being readily accessible on the internet doesn't mean there is no validity to it.
 
zgoldsmith23 said:
Somer -

I bet he uses the same few sources / arguments so here: Wayno's "argument(s)" They just kinda start there. :cheers:
Click to expand...

Actually one of the links I provided was from the Israeli holocaust memorial and the other was from Wagner's personal writings.
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
I'm not trying to link the two. It's what I recall reading in numerous academic texts, when covering the assimilated jews of Europe and their failure to integrate into larger European society
Click to expand...

I'd like to glance at them. Name?

Sorry, information not being readily accessible on the internet doesn't mean there is no validity to it.
Click to expand...

Certainly not but if there isn't a source then it's less than likely to be true (to say the least).
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
Actually one of the links I provided was from the Israeli holocaust memorial and the other was from Wagner's personal writings.
Click to expand...

I wasn't talking to you or about you so... unless you're Wayno or Mrs. Wayno, then:

tumblr_lp8j0a1sRR1qiqv2o.gif
 
Last edited:
zgoldsmith23 said:
I wasn't talking to you or about you so... unless you're Wayno or Mrs. Wayno, then:

tumblr_lp8j0a1sRR1qiqv2o.gif
Click to expand...

the quote you posted, and commented on, was directed at me ...
 
zgoldsmith23 said:
I'd like to glance at them. Name?
Click to expand...

One I think, was Charles D. Smith's Palistine and the Arab/Iraeli conflict. But any basic history covoring that period and region should mention it. I'm pretty sure it's basic stuff



zgoldsmith23 said:
Certainly not but if there isn't a source then it's less than likely to be true (to say the least).
Click to expand...

You seem to confusing a lack of an easily accessible online source and the absence of a source. Also, I provided two here, already
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
the quote you posted, and commented on, was directed at me ...
Click to expand...

Did I refer to you? Nope. Somer and Wayno was all my post was regarding. Reading comprehension, try it some time.

Dr. Chuckles said:
One I think, was Charles D. Smith's Palistine and the Arab/Iraeli conflict. But any basic history covoring that period and region should mention it. I'm pretty sure it's basic stuff
Click to expand...

Hmm. I'll look in to it.

You seem to confusing a lack of an easily accessible online source and the absence of a source. Also, I provided two here, already
Click to expand...

I'm not completely discrediting the idea entirely. The claim just loses quite a bit of merit.
 
zgoldsmith23 said:
Did I refer to you? Nope. Somer and Wayno was all my post was regarding. Reading comprehension, try it some time.
Click to expand...

Again, you quoted a post directly quoting and referencing me. So maybe you should work on your reading comprehension



I'm not completely discrediting the idea entirely. The claim just loses quite a bit of merit.
Click to expand...

Again, I provided two sources here
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
Again, you quoted a post directly quoting and referencing me. So maybe you should work on your reading comprehension
Click to expand...

How did I reference you? I mentioned "Somer" and "Wayno."

Again, I provided two sources here
Click to expand...

I said I'd investigate, no?
 
zgoldsmith23 said:
How did I reference you? I mentioned "Somer" and "Wayno."
Click to expand...

Uhh, the post from Somer that you quoted and commented on was in direct reference to me.



zgoldsmith23 said:
I said I'd investigate, no?
Click to expand...


You mentioned the claim losing merit because an absence of sources. There are already sources provided in this thread
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
Uhh, the post from Somer that you quoted and commented on was in direct reference to me.
Click to expand...

That's not referencing you - that's reference Somer and Wayno, as I specified in my reply.

You mentioned the claim losing merit because an absence of sources. There are already sources provided in this thread
Click to expand...

Considering I haven't looked at the sources yet, it'd be default not to assume it's true.
 
zgoldsmith23 said:
That's not referencing you - that's reference Somer and Wayno, as I specified in my reply.
Click to expand...

No, the post you quote from somer directly references me.

see here

http://www.debatepolitics.com/philo...darwinism-lead-bigotry-43.html#post1061465820



zgoldsmith23 said:
Considering I haven't looked at the sources yet, it'd be default not to assume it's true.
Click to expand...

You were claiming there was a lack of sources. There was not and such isn't dependent on you "looking at them"
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
you seemed to be assuming it was false, not remaining "open"
Click to expand...

It'd be default not to accepting things unless there is evidence of them. You've cited the evidence but that doesn't mean it's inherently true.
 
zgoldsmith23 said:
It'd be default not to accepting things unless there is evidence of them. You've cited the evidence but that doesn't mean it's inherently true.
Click to expand...

But you were seemingly dismissing it from ignorance, not a lack of evidence. There is a key difference there
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
But you were seemingly dismissing it from ignorance, not a lack of evidence. There is a key difference there
Click to expand...

I think the part you are missing is that he is not dismissing it out of ignorance or even for lack of evidence, but rather he is withholding judgement and not accepting it until there is a chance to examine the evidence. This is the hallmark of a skeptic.
 
Last edited:
marduc said:
I think the part you are missing is that he is not dismissing it out of ignorance or even for lack of evidence, but rather he is withholding judgement and not accepting it until there is a chance to examine the evidence to consider it. This is the hallmark of a skeptic.
Click to expand...

No, earlier he seemed to simply dismiss it, out of hand, without investigation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom