Social Darwinism

Post Reply New Topic

I would like to know your opinons on Social Darwinsim?

What is commonly called "Social Darwinism" is a misinterpretation and misapplication of the ideas of Charles Darwin to social and economic issues. The chief exponent of "Social Darwinism" was NOT Charles Darwin, it was Herbert Spencer.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Dar ... Darwinists

The term "Social Darwinism" is an attempt to hijack the valid observations of Charles Darwin concerning the development of plant and animal species in the wild and misapply them them to contemporary social, economic and racial issues. It is most galling that "Social Darwinists" attempt to justify racism by misusing the ideas of a man (Charles Darwin) who hated slavery and hated racism and cruelty.

ruveuyn

"Social Selection" seems to be a more apt term, in that for any given social group, its members are selected by the others (consciously or not) for their general attractiveness. This includes appearance, beliefs, confidence, and other superficial attributes that do not necessarily make for good breeding stock, but that ensure the survival of the group identity.

Think of every social clique from high school ... did their group identities ever really change in four years, in spite of a complete turnover in membership?

^^^this. Its based on going environment, we're in one where social skills and being someone that people can 'get' without ever trying is in premium (then again both of these likely always have been - just that the new 'service' industry as the norm is even forcing it out more).


Its tracked through most of adulthood as well. Even the kid who was an outcast or too odd in gradeschool who became an extrovert and quite socially skilled later - people can still sense that they're different and accordingly there will be a subtle effect of them being treated as 'new money' so to speak (think of the movie Titanic). They'll be superficially treated as equals and sort of 'humored' but you never really see them become haves in the same sense as social old-money. I know from having quite a few NT or at least mostly-NT friends in that position.

Yes Herbert Spencer was the one who came up with Social Darwinism not Charles Darwin.

I have always supported the idea but never would support it in practice becaus I am against racism I find it ironic that many racist people are in fact part of the race they hate some where down the line.

The survial of the fittest part is true the weak will always serve the strong

To the extent that it is an attempt to observe and understand human societies, I am prepared to accept that it is a hypothesis that must be subjected to rigour.

Are people racist, intolerant and bigoted? Some--but not all. Do those some conduct themselves in a way that attempts to preserve their racism, intolerance and bigotry? Perhaps. Does that conduct serve to accomplish that end? Doubtful.

But that is not what we see here. What we see is the use of flawed observation and analysis to propound a political agenda.

there is a thing called Evolutionary Economics that applies evolutionary theory to
economic behavior Ironically with quite different results than the armchair "social darwinists"
here is a link to the founding paper
http://elegant-technology.com/resource/ECO_SCI.PDF/
and a link to a Journal on the field.
http://www.afee.net/

lol @ Joker, weak or strong? There's none of that... It's a question of who is more adapted (read: fit). A lion is undoubtedly stronger than a mouse, but it can't free himself from a net if humans try to capture it, whereas a mouse will usually escape. Being strong doesn't always gets you on top, sometimes being smarter does, sometimes not. =/

Personally, I think it's an ugly, heartless philosophy, which only is meant to justify social inequities for political reasons. Unlike real Darwinism, social Darwinism is nothing more than a pseudoscience.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

People who perhaps believe that its a great and wonderful thing that the weak are destroyed and the strong exhalted might be shite. The reality that it happens just by ease of physics and stating that it happens though isn't deluded nor does it make the observer in favor of it, it just points out that they're observant.

I'm sorry, but I don't buy into social Darwinism as a force of physics. Poor people get s**t on by those in upper classes because that's simply what the rich want to happen. I can't believe that there's anything natural about it.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Ugly, heartless, whatever, but it's human nature and will always be.

This is from the creationist christian?
Are you one of those guys that Inuasha whines about sent by the DNC to make conservatives look bad?

So, which part of human nature do you believe has any relationship with the concepts of social darwinism?.

You're the monkey you tell me about it.
Or will you just get mad and throw s**t at me?

another angry projection of anger?
is waptow mad at the big mean smarty-pants?