Liberty Defined: Evolution

[pcosmar]

Hitler is completely irrelevant.

NO. Hitler is NOT irrelevant. That is the point.
These theories (and that is all they are) are the basis of Eugenics. (a pseudoscience)
Hitler took that to it's logical conclusion.

And before you start disrespecting Dr.Paul's education remember that the Piltdown Man was widely accepted as a relevant scientific discovery and proof of evolution.
Until it was proven to be a hoax. (Forgery)

Fake As in,, Never existed.

 

[ClayTrainor]

Lois Bourne is not Louis Bouroune

wow, that's my bad, lol. Dam you google auto-correct! :o

 

[sevin]

Another argument about evolution?






Really?

 

[Sola_Fide]

Now, I don't really care whether Ron Paul, or anyone else, accepts Evolution. It'd be better if everyone did as it'd help medical advancement but, to paraphrase Jefferson, it neither breaks my bones or empties my pocket.

How does the theory of evolution help "medical advancement"?

 

[Dr.3D]

How does the theory of evolution help "medical advancement"?

Maybe they can figure out how to evolve cold blooded reptiles into warm blooded birds. LOL

 

[heavenlyboy34]

Another argument about evolution?


Really?

Yep, believe it or not-it's happened!

 

[heavenlyboy34]

How does the theory of evolution help "medical advancement"?

I'd like to know the answer to that myself. It's on the back cover of my copy of "Origin Of Species", and I've heard it thrown around casually in conversation.

 

[Theocrat]

Progression is Not Really the Problem With Evolution

Regardless of what he meant or what the "true meaning" of evolution is, the overriding point for me is that the theory of evolution has been the philosophical grounds for the murderous tyrannies of the 20th century.

The funny thing is within the paradigm of evolution there can be no such thing as "murder" nor "tyranny." What happens in societies is just a result of impersonal, biological and chemical reactions within the human body. In other words, evolution does not derive any "oughts" for how we should live, so those "murderous tyrannies" which you speak of cannot logically nor morally exist, if evolution is true.

 

[Sola_Fide]

The funny thing is within the paradigm of evolution there can be no such thing as "murder" nor "tyranny." What happens in societies is just a result of impersonal, biological and chemical reactions within the human body. In other words, evolution does not derive any "oughts" for how we should live, so those "murderous tyrannies" which you speak of cannot logically nor morally exist, if evolution is true.

Exactly. This is the "is-ought" fallacy. Ethics cannot be derived from what is, because "what is" would have to be acceptable morally. You can't derive an "ought" from what "is".

This is the reason that secular worldviews inevitably provide the basis for tyranny.

 

[Sola_Fide]

NO. Hitler is NOT irrelevant. That is the point.
These theories (and that is all they are) are the basis of Eugenics. (a pseudoscience)
Hitler took that to it's logical conclusion.

And before you start disrespecting Dr.Paul's education remember that the Piltdown Man was widely accepted as a relevant scientific discovery and proof of evolution.
Until it was proven to be a hoax. (Forgery)

Fake As in,, Never existed.

Great post.

The fairy tale of evolution was the basis for eugenics, the basis for communism, the basis for nazism, and generally the basis for every major tyranny in the 20th century post modern age.

Atheism and the theory of evolution has been the philosophical grounds for more death, misery, and tyranny than any other worldview in history.

 

[amy31416]

Great post.

The fairy tale of evolution was the basis for eugenics, the basis for communism, the basis for nazism, and generally the basis for every major tyranny in the 20th century post modern age.

Atheism and the theory of evolution has been the philosophical grounds for more death, misery, and tyranny than any other worldview in history.

Just goes to show how far the "ruling class" will go in order to manipulate, eh? I mean look at how they use and manipulate religion toward the same ends.

That said, you're massively exaggerating that it's been the "philosophical grounds for more death, misery, and tyranny than any other worldview in history." It hasn't been around long enough, unlike Judaism, Christianity or Islam.

 

[amy31416]

I'd like to know the answer to that myself. It's on the back cover of my copy of "Origin Of Species", and I've heard it thrown around casually in conversation.

I suppose in genetic studies. We've been artificially "evolving" (manipulating) bacteria for a while now in order to learn how genes work and bacteria evolve.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

I've been reading Paul's "Liberty Defined" and have, for the most part, been in partial to full agreement. However the closing statements of the "Evolution v Creation" chapter confuse me.

Was this a serious point or a tongue in cheek remark?

If it's the latter it was put across quite poorly. If it's the former then RP doesn't understand Evolution.

Now, I don't really care whether Ron Paul, or anyone else, accepts Evolution. It'd be better if everyone did as it'd help medical advancement but, to paraphrase Jefferson, it neither breaks my bones or empties my pocket.

What bothers me is that Ron, generally a smart guy, seems to have not bothered to understand Evolution before making an argument against it. Other than that I agree with the general message of the chapter.

My interpretation is that Ron took this as an opportunity to bring up his anti-war, anti-murder stance. The connection and transition is awkward though.

Evolution is a process that takes a long time. It's influence and application on day to day, year to year or century to century activities is completely meaningless. It's like watching the price of silver for a single minute and trying to make sense out of it.

 

[YumYum]

Regardless of what he meant or what the "true meaning" of evolution is, the overriding point for me is that the theory of evolution has been the philosophical grounds for the murderous tyrannies of the 20th century.

What were the grounds for roasting alive tens of thousands Catholics by Christians, and tens of thousands of Christians by Catholics in the 16th Century?

 

[Dr.3D]

What were the grounds for roasting alive tens of thousands Catholics by Christians, and tens of thousands of Christians by Catholics in the 16th Century?

What, are you saying Catholics aren't Christians?

 

[YumYum]

What, are you saying Catholics aren't Christians?

I am saying they both had roastabilty.

 

[Sola_Fide]

What were the grounds for roasting alive tens of thousands Catholics by Christians, and tens of thousands of Christians by Catholics in the 16th Century?

What are you taking about?

 

[YumYum]

What are you taking about?

You're blaming evolution for the tyranny of evil dictators of the 20th Century. I'm merely pointing out that religious fanatics murdered in the "name of God" throughout history, so, evolutionists don't have an exclusive on tyranny. I know evolutionists who are very much against violence in any form. Human nature that is evil is universal, it isn't cultivated because of a belief we came from primates.

 

[Ex Lux lucis]

Great post.

The fairy tale of evolution was the basis for eugenics, the basis for communism, the basis for nazism, and generally the basis for every major tyranny in the 20th century post modern age.

Atheism and the theory of evolution has been the philosophical grounds for more death, misery, and tyranny than any other worldview in history.

If some dictator or tyrant had claimed the germ theory of disease as the basis for his atrocities, would that mean we would have to discard that theory? I realize the analogy is not altogether apt, but it demonstrates the lunacy of discarding a theory based on what was done in its name. And I'm not sure you can claim that:

"Atheism and the theory of evolution has been the philosophical grounds for more death, misery, and tyranny than any other worldview in history."

While many of the 20th century's dictators have been atheists,(Hitler, notably, was not.) none used atheism as the philosophical basis for their atrocities. Their atheism did not drive them to commit slaughter.

 

[Gimme Some Truth]

The thread is about RP's view on evolution. Others disagree with him. The relevance should be self-explanatory.

You were replying to the following:

He doesn't understand Evolution if he thinks that people would be becoming nicer if it were a reality.

Your choice of quote wasn't relevant.

Concerning the quote itself, do you have any idea how it originated? Am I to believe that you take Kent Hovind seriously?