Iraq's Radioactive Town

Lyrs · Post by **Lyrs** » Thu Jun 26, 2003 7:47 pm

Alucard_FoN wrote:I call it natural selection, and I support it 100%.

i think you mean "social evolution," right?

/end

EarthCurrent · Post by **EarthCurrent** » Thu Jun 26, 2003 7:48 pm

Alucard_FoN wrote:I call it natural selection, and I support it 100%.

Your confusing natural selection with social darwinism.

Lyrs · Post by **Lyrs** » Thu Jun 26, 2003 7:51 pm

My bad.

EC wrote:social darwinism

/end

EarthCurrent · Post by **EarthCurrent** » Thu Jun 26, 2003 8:18 pm

Social evolution is a proper term as well, since the whole concept was developed by Howard Spencer, not Darwin. The term Social Darwinism got associated with the concept in the 1930s to make it sound like it had a level of "scientific" credibility. Darwin never touched on the concept of cultural evolution/superiority/inferiority, and its hard to say if he would have agreed with the idea. Personally, I sort of doubt it.

EarthCurrent · Post by **EarthCurrent** » Thu Jun 26, 2003 8:20 pm

Bah, it's Herbert Spencer...not Howard

kthulhu · Post by **kthulhu** » Thu Jun 26, 2003 8:26 pm

I want radioactive bricks in my walls.

It's the new American dream, isn't it? Or was it last year's?

jonmartensen · Post by **jonmartensen** » Thu Jun 26, 2003 8:30 pm

We got shitty radioactive Mexican rebar used in a major freeway near Houston. They had to tear it up and use Hi-Kwality canadian/US rebar.

EarthCurrent · Post by **EarthCurrent** » Thu Jun 26, 2003 8:32 pm

jonmartensen wrote:We got shitty radioactive Mexican rebar used in a major freeway near Houston. They had to tear it up and use Hi-Kwality canadian/US rebar.

Rooo??? EC desires more knowledge on this...

Alucard_FoN · Post by **Alucard_FoN** » Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:34 pm

No, it's natural selection. They're stupid enough to do shit like that, and it will kill them, or at least sterilize them, therefore preventing them from passing on their stupid genes to another generation.

EarthCurrent · Post by **EarthCurrent** » Thu Jun 26, 2003 11:02 pm

Alucard_FoN wrote:No, it's natural selection. They're stupid enough to do shit like that, and it will kill them, or at least sterilize them, therefore preventing them from passing on their stupid genes to another generation.

You're still arguing Social Darwinism, and it is obvious you don't know the difference between it and natural selection.

Here are the key points of Natural Selection:

1. The resources of an environment are limited. Creatures produce more offspring than can possibly survive. Members of a species must compete for limited resources and for survival.

2. No two members of a species are exactly alike. Each organism contains an individual combination of inherited traits. Some traits are useful for survival; other traits are not.

3. Organisms that have useful traits reproduce in greater numbers. Their offspring inherit the traits. Organisms with unfavorable traits eventually die off. The fittest survive.

4. Nature selects different traits at different times. Varieties within a species gradually create a new species.

Here is the main argument for Social Darwinism as put forward by Spencer:

Within the human species, nations are locked in a struggle for survival. Everywhere, civilized nations are supplanting barbarous nations. Advanced civilization, obviously, has inherited valuable traits from its ancestors. Underdeveloped cultures, except in hostile climates, will soon die off. Therefore, natural order obligates powerful, civilized nations to appropriate the limited resources of the weak.