Charles Darwin denounced by Princeton anthropologist in the American Academy for the Advancement of Science's magazine (racist, vote)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Teachers can still mention him in class but must note that he was a racist, sexist English man who had dangerous, harmful ideas.
Quote:
Darwin saw humans as part of the natural world, animals that evolved (descended) from ancestral primates according to processes and patterns similar for all life. For Darwin, to know the human body and mind, we must know other animals and their (and our) descent with modification across lineages and time. But despite these ideal frames and some innovative inferences, “Descent” is often problematic, prejudiced, and injurious. Darwin thought he was relying on data, objectivity, and scientific thinking in describing human evolutionary outcomes. But for much of the book, he was not. “Descent,” like so many of the scientific tomes of Darwin's day, offers a racist and sexist view of humanity.
---
Today, students are taught Darwin as the “father of evolutionary theory,” a genius scientist. They should also be taught Darwin as an English man with injurious and unfounded prejudices that warped his view of data and experience. Racists, sexists, and white supremacists...
Well yeah most people were still racist and sexist in the 19th century. Women couldn’t even vote, white supremacy was still de jure law in many places. That doesn’t mean all accomplishments anyone achieved in that century are not valid.
Teachers can still "mention" him? ???? If you don't teach Darwin's concepts, you'll have no idea why overuse of pesticides and antibiotics is dangerous.
But you have to couple Darwin with Dawkin's concept of the Selfish Gene. Darwin got it almost right. Survival of the fittest is half the concept - it's the gene that wants to replicate that drives species success.
Teachers can still "mention" him? ???? If you don't teach Darwin's concepts, you'll have no idea why overuse of pesticides and antibiotics is dangerous.
But you have to couple Darwin with Dawkin's concept of the Selfish Gene. Darwin got it almost right. Survival of the fittest is half the concept - it's the gene that wants to replicate that drives species success.
Darwin’s genius was that he figured out the majority of things about evolution without having any access to modern genetics where evolution can easily be observed at the DNA/cellular level.
Darwin’s genius was that he figured out the majority of things about evolution without having any access to modern genetics where evolution can easily be observed at the DNA/cellular level.
Exactly and science has it's self evolved since Darwin, just as physics has since Newton.
This guy is just trying to flog his latest book.
As for his views, I really don't care, although I am sure there are scientists out there ready to criticise his work, and he will be subject to peer review.
Well yeah most people were still racist and sexist in the 19th century. Women couldn’t even vote, white supremacy was still de jure law in many places. That doesn’t mean all accomplishments anyone achieved in that century are not valid.
Looks like Darwin's accomplishments are now tainted to the point that he is problematic in any woke classroom.
That's bad enough, but when Science hates science we've really got a problem.
Sounds like a good idea for a South Park episode.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.