HOW RIDICULOUS I've always accepted that evolution is the most scientifically supported explanation for the diversity of species, I've never gone close to denying that. Nor would I. If you believe that belief in Darwinism is the same thing as the belief in evolution, that only means you don't know much about it. But I think, unless you are a biology teacher or otherwise work in a part of the life sciences which requires a knowledge of evolution, the belief in it or failure to believe in it is relatively unimportant. I'm not bothered by people who are stupid not believing in evolution, I'm more worried about them not believing that people releasing carbon into the atmosphere is responsible for global warming. You can't do much about the lost past when species evolved, you can do something about the future which is where many species, likely including our own, will end if we don't stop global warming. For someone like the typical buffalo butt blog rat at a has-been dive like Eschaton, it's got nothing to do with science and everything about class-status, conformity to middle-brow college-credentialed common received kulcha. I'll bet most of them have never read anything ol' Chuck wrote and most of the ones that did, it was probably Voyage of the Beagle, his most engaging book for the scientifically uninterested. Which reminds me of this passage of Brit aristocratic anthropology-poli-sci babble about the disaster that equality and equal sharing of possessions leads to from that early book.
The perfect equality among the individuals composing the Fuegian tribes
must for a long time retard their civilization. As we see those animals,
whose instinct compels them to live in society and obey a chief, are most
capable of improvement, so is it with the races of mankind. Whether we
look at it as a cause or a consequence, the more civilized always have the
most artificial governments. For instance, the inhabitants of Otaheite,
who, when first discovered, were governed by hereditary kings, had arrived
at a far higher grade than another branch of the same people, the New
Zealanders,—who, although benefited by being compelled to turn their
attention to agriculture, were republicans in the most absolute sense. In
Tierra del Fuego, until some chief shall arise with power sufficient to
secure any acquired advantage, such as the domesticated animals, it seems
scarcely possible that the political state of the country can be improved.
At present, even a piece of cloth given to one is torn into shreds and
distributed; and no one individual becomes richer than another. On the
other hand, it is difficult to understand how a chief can arise till there
is property of some sort by which he might manifest his superiority and
increase his power.
I'M A HELL OF A LOT MORE WORRIED ABOUT PEOPLE WITH COLLEGE CREDENTIALS WHO BELIEVE CRYPTO-FASCIST STUFF LIKE THAT. And there are plenty who do, thanks to Chuckie.
It's no wonder that the guy went back to England, read Malthus for his own diversion and came up with a claim that inevitably generated eugenics, new levels of scientific racism and and proto-Nazism among his followers with his most devoted followers and supporters within science with his full knowledge and with his full support. That he was a rich British aristocrat was the key to everything with him.
I don't think Duncan was trying to pick some kind of fight with me with that post, I don't think he's stupid enough to want to pick one with me and am confident that he realizes it would be too much like, well, let me spell it out, w.o.r.k. for him to try it. I think he was just blowing off steam about Mangy Madge, MTG, though him using an antique Salon article by a former blogger from Duncan's glory days to do it is rather weird way to do it. Maybe it's the last thing he read on the topic. As you can see, I've read more recent things from more challenging writers.
No comments:
Post a Comment