Darwin, Nazi Eugenics and Selective Breeding

Youtube ^ | December 30, 2008

[Ethan Clive Osgoode]

Click here and watch the video.

[Ethan Clive Osgoode]

The video mentions Marie Stopes. She was a member of the Eugenics Society. She left her fortune to the Eugenics Society, and they used it to establish the Marie Stopes foundation. Her grandson was a member of the American Eugenics Society.

More here: Darwinism-Eugenics

[Ethan Clive Osgoode]

Marie Stopes ping.

[hinckley buzzard]

It should be kept in mind that eugenics was considered a legitimate science long before the Nazi's capitalized on it for political purposes. It orignated with the work of Galton in England and was established in the US as well as Europe.

The highly developed practice of animal breeding is an obvious referent for the scientific validity of the enterprise, which has failed not on scientific but on ethical and moral grounds.

[tlb]

Godwin’s law was first formulated in 1990 by Mike Godwin. It reads:

“As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one.”

In plain English: Sooner or later in a discussion, someone is going to compare something to either Hitler or Nazi Germany.

A very popular addon to this rule is that whoever makes the Nazi/Hitler-comparison automatically forfeits the argument in favor of his or hers opponent.

[stockpirate]

Coming to America soon. There will be FORCED abortions of the feeble, unwanted babies in and out of the womb.

And still America will do nothing.

[count-your-change]

And who is this Godwin?

[SlapHappyPappy]

The problem with the application of Godwin’s Law is that it usually ignores the fact that there are times when comparisons to Hitler and Nazis are legitimate.

[ReignOfError]

Animal husbandry proved, centuries before Darwin, that creatures can be bred to enhance useful traits. The problem with applying that logic to humans is, as you point out, a moral and ethical one: Useful to whom? Who decides? Any answer to those questions requires value judgments on inherently unscientific grounds.

The essential failure of eugenics as a legitimate science is that science is descriptive, not prescriptive. When you use physics to build something, you’re an engineer, not a physicist. If you use biology to practical ends, you’re a physician, not a biologist.

The issue is not that this or that experiment in Eugenics failed, but that it is inherently unscientific and immoral.

[mountainlion]

Liberals seem more interested in politics than evolution of liberalism. They have fewer kids and will lessen their population. 15% liberals and 35% conservatives now.

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

The highly developed practice of animal breeding is an obvious referent for the scientific validity of the enterprise,

And it was entirely HETEROSEXUAL... imagine that...

"What's he that is not born of woman?"

Macbeth. Act V, scene VII.

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

One thing the left hates about evolutionary theory more than anything...

Evolution is only possible through heterosexual relationships.

That is a sticking point that should be exploited to the fullest.

[Ethan Clive Osgoode]

The problem with the application of Godwin’s Law is that it usually ignores the fact that there are times when comparisons to Hitler and Nazis are legitimate.

Godwin's law doesn't even apply when you're talking about nazis in the first place. Otherwise you'd have to say William Shirer godwined himself when he wrote "Rise and Fall of the Third Reich."

[SlapHappyPappy]

Not when you are talking about Nazis but when you are talking about legitimate mirroring of Nazi policy or beliefs. There are times when it is a legitimate comparison. Usually it’s overstatement, but not always.