LOL. Stein’s been reading too much late-era Normal Mailer.
Hairy Polemic - 12:04pm on 04/30/2008
Norman Mailer rather.
Hairy Polemic - 12:04pm on 04/30/2008
April 21 is the show, and methinks that the NR guy is overwrought about this. Stein notes that his main beef is not directly with science itself, but rather with “scientists telling them what to do.” In other words, the quibble is not with the technological advances made possible by science, but rather the moral desert that happens from purely materialistic philosophy.
Which, yes, involved Hitler. Here an interview that points out that Darwin’s philosophy is prominent in Mein Kampf.
I think creationism is about the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard of (though I respect people’s right to believe it if they want), but if you’re going to be an advocate for it you may want to avoid saying things as abysmally stupid as “science leads you to killing people.”
Rob - 12:04pm on 04/30/2008
Which, yes, involved Hitler. Here an interview that points out that Darwin’s philosophy is prominent in Mein Kampf.
Making this comparison is like judging Christianity based on the history of the inquisitions. Not all pursuit of science has been on sound moral footing, but the same can be said of religion.
I don’t think it’s fair to tar science with with Hitler’s ghoulish experimenters any more than it’s fair to tar Christians with the legacy of dark-age Catholics.
Rob - 12:04pm on 04/30/2008
Ben Stein is pretty smart, but when he argues religious views he makes elementary mistakes.
likwidshoe - 12:04pm on 04/30/2008
Why is it unfair to point out that Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, and legions of other Communists taught Darwin before introducing Marx, Rob?
Sorry, friend, but this is an ugly historical fact; science unmoored from the moral claims of tradition and religion has repeatedly led to genocide and war--in a way that makes most every previous atrocity pale in comparison--by orders of magnitude.
And again, you’ve got to read this in its context, which includes what Stein notes about Auschwitz, and it includes also the fact that the film itself is a plea for open minded science, not the end of it.
Derbyshire, again, bobbles this one something fierce by ignoring the context.
Bike Bubba - 01:04pm on 04/30/2008
Sorry, friend, but this is an ugly historical fact; science unmoored from the moral claims of tradition and religion has repeatedly led to genocide and war...
Survival of the fittest is practiced in nature. This is devoid of “moral claims of tradition” as well as religion. It’s just a cold hard fact.
Don’t blame the fact. Blame the tyrants.
likwidshoe - 01:04pm on 04/30/2008
Sorry, friend, but this is an ugly historical fact; science unmoored from the moral claims of tradition and religion has repeatedly led to genocide and war
I could say that religion more often than science has led to genocide and war (the body count is still mounting in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict).
I tire of people impugning atheists (and I take this personally because I am one) by invoking secular regimes like Mao, Stalin, etc. (Hitler, I’d add, was quite spiritual if not exactly Christian though I think sometimes those of you with religion need the difference between “atheism” and things like “paganism” pounded into your skulls). It’s tiresome. I mean, how many people have the Muslims murdered in the name of their religion? How about the Catholics? The Crusades? How many protestants and Catholics have killed each other in England throughout the ages? And Ireland?
For being grounded in tradition and morality, killing in the name of religion has a much higher body count than killing in the name of atheism.
But setting all that aside, do you really think that this line of argument excuses creationism which ignores a gigantic body of science about the age of this planet and its changes throughout eons of history? Science which, frankly, has little to do with morality and a whole lot to do with just the age of rocks and things?
You expect me to believe creationists when they tell me the earth is only 2,000 years old based on nothing more than some notion that they have a monopoly on morality?
This is why creationists aren’t taken seriously.
Rob - 01:04pm on 04/30/2008
Well said, Lik, except for one thing; most animals don’t kill their own kind except in dire circumstances. So no, Hobbes’ “Nature red in tooth and claw” is something of a myth.
And you want to compare the Inquisition--a few tens of thousands over a space of centuries--to the Darwin-inspired Holocaust, or Stalin’s purges, or Lenin’s purges, or the Cultural Revolution, which killed tens of millions over the space of decades or less?
Be my guest, Rob. Let’s compare, knowing that the kill rate for the latter exceeds that of the former by about four or five orders of magnitude.
And no, the argument for a young earth and special creation does not begin and end with the moral argument for God’s existence, let alone from any claim that religious believers of any persuasion are intrinsically the only moral people. You’ve got issues like the cooling of the earth, the orbits of planetary moons, rapid deposition of rock layers, petroglyphs clearly showing dinosaurs and legends of dragons, and abundant anthropological evidence across hundreds of cultures referring to a worldwide flood.
LOL. Stein’s been reading too much late-era Normal Mailer.
Norman Mailer rather.
April 21 is the show, and methinks that the NR guy is overwrought about this. Stein notes that his main beef is not directly with science itself, but rather with “scientists telling them what to do.” In other words, the quibble is not with the technological advances made possible by science, but rather the moral desert that happens from purely materialistic philosophy.
Which, yes, involved Hitler. Here an interview that points out that Darwin’s philosophy is prominent in Mein Kampf.
http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/articles5/OlaskyHitler.php
He said “science leads you to killing people.”
I think creationism is about the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard of (though I respect people’s right to believe it if they want), but if you’re going to be an advocate for it you may want to avoid saying things as abysmally stupid as “science leads you to killing people.”
Making this comparison is like judging Christianity based on the history of the inquisitions. Not all pursuit of science has been on sound moral footing, but the same can be said of religion.
I don’t think it’s fair to tar science with with Hitler’s ghoulish experimenters any more than it’s fair to tar Christians with the legacy of dark-age Catholics.
Ben Stein is pretty smart, but when he argues religious views he makes elementary mistakes.
Why is it unfair to point out that Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, and legions of other Communists taught Darwin before introducing Marx, Rob?
Sorry, friend, but this is an ugly historical fact; science unmoored from the moral claims of tradition and religion has repeatedly led to genocide and war--in a way that makes most every previous atrocity pale in comparison--by orders of magnitude.
And again, you’ve got to read this in its context, which includes what Stein notes about Auschwitz, and it includes also the fact that the film itself is a plea for open minded science, not the end of it.
Derbyshire, again, bobbles this one something fierce by ignoring the context.
Sorry, friend, but this is an ugly historical fact; science unmoored from the moral claims of tradition and religion has repeatedly led to genocide and war...
Survival of the fittest is practiced in nature. This is devoid of “moral claims of tradition” as well as religion. It’s just a cold hard fact.
Don’t blame the fact. Blame the tyrants.
I could say that religion more often than science has led to genocide and war (the body count is still mounting in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict).
I tire of people impugning atheists (and I take this personally because I am one) by invoking secular regimes like Mao, Stalin, etc. (Hitler, I’d add, was quite spiritual if not exactly Christian though I think sometimes those of you with religion need the difference between “atheism” and things like “paganism” pounded into your skulls). It’s tiresome. I mean, how many people have the Muslims murdered in the name of their religion? How about the Catholics? The Crusades? How many protestants and Catholics have killed each other in England throughout the ages? And Ireland?
For being grounded in tradition and morality, killing in the name of religion has a much higher body count than killing in the name of atheism.
But setting all that aside, do you really think that this line of argument excuses creationism which ignores a gigantic body of science about the age of this planet and its changes throughout eons of history? Science which, frankly, has little to do with morality and a whole lot to do with just the age of rocks and things?
You expect me to believe creationists when they tell me the earth is only 2,000 years old based on nothing more than some notion that they have a monopoly on morality?
This is why creationists aren’t taken seriously.
Well said, Lik, except for one thing; most animals don’t kill their own kind except in dire circumstances. So no, Hobbes’ “Nature red in tooth and claw” is something of a myth.
And you want to compare the Inquisition--a few tens of thousands over a space of centuries--to the Darwin-inspired Holocaust, or Stalin’s purges, or Lenin’s purges, or the Cultural Revolution, which killed tens of millions over the space of decades or less?
Be my guest, Rob. Let’s compare, knowing that the kill rate for the latter exceeds that of the former by about four or five orders of magnitude.
And no, the argument for a young earth and special creation does not begin and end with the moral argument for God’s existence, let alone from any claim that religious believers of any persuasion are intrinsically the only moral people. You’ve got issues like the cooling of the earth, the orbits of planetary moons, rapid deposition of rock layers, petroglyphs clearly showing dinosaurs and legends of dragons, and abundant anthropological evidence across hundreds of cultures referring to a worldwide flood.
And lots more.