 |
|
| Science Forum Index » Bio Evolution Forum » Dawkins Paradox... |
|
Page 1 of 1 |
|
| Author |
Message |
| John Edser... |
 Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2009 5:44 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
WNYC Radio Lab Podcast "In Defense Of Darwinism? (available as a free
podcast on Itunes)
Dawkins opened: "As an academic scientist I am a passionate Darwinian
believing that natural selection is, if not the only driving force in
evolution, certainly the only known force capable of producing the
illusion of purpose which so strikes all who contemplate nature".
But at the same time I support Darwinism as a scientist I am a
passionate ANTI-DARWINIAN when it comes to politics and how we should
conduct our human affairs."
"I would not like to live in a society which is run on Darwinian
principles while fully acknowledging that the brains and bodies that we
possess were put there by Darwinian principles in the first place".
"If you try to apply the lessons of Social Darwinism as the social
Darwinists did to human society, then you end up with a kind of super
Thatcherism, or even Hitler".
In this interesting podcast Professor Dawkins makes it clear that he
thinks that Darwinian principles are somehow, equatable to Social
Darwinism. They are not. Spencer's 100% empty "survival of the fittest"
tautology is still being misused by Dawkins et al. In the podcast
Professor Dawkins equates Social Darwinism with H. G. Wells appalling
book "The New Republic" in which the fitter are defined as simply, those
that can murder. Fascist selection by intent has nothing to to with
Darwinian natural selection by default and being able to murder another
person does not prove you are fitter in any Darwinian sense. It is our
conscious ability to trade, not to murder, which makes us so very
different to other species. Dawkins, as as a self proclaimed hard left
socialist, quite wrongly regards Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Regan as
Social Darwinian along with the free market principles they developed
allowing the world economy as we see it today.
W.D.Hamilton developed the mathematical model on which Dawkins
poly-centric Neo Darwinism remains based. This was developed from just a
sketch in a pub in England by J.B.S. Haldane who died a self proclaimed
communist. Later George R. Price revived Hamilton's tautological model
with even more tautological mathematics. At the end of his life Price
gave away everything he owned and killed himself. These are the people,
the ideas and the political history on which Dawkins bases his selfish-
genes-promoting-altruistic-in-fitness-organisms band wagon. I think it
is clear that Dawkins et al have a political agenda: to prove at any
cost that nature endorses fitness altruism. Nature does nothing of the
sort. The truth of the matter is that nature does not endorse fitness
altruism or even fitness selfishness, just total fitness mutualism.
Because Dawkins et al have no frame of reference they cannot even claim
to be able to distinguish fitness altruism from fitness selfishness, and
even more importantly either of these from total fitness mutualism. If
they had the mind to see, they would see that just about everywhere
nature is teaching us to cooperate and compete simultaneously. What does
this tell you?
Regards,
John Edser
Independent Researcher
edser at (no spam) ozemail.com.au |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Thu Nov 26, 2009 4:13 pm
|
|