Hey dudes I've heard before that darwin was a racist but decided to look into it a tad so I am going to show some stuff that says he's racist and someone else show some stuff to say he wasn't.
Not anymore or at least not physical strength. Survival of the fittest should be interpreted as survival of those who can gain the most resources and reproduce more frequently.
You must not have paid attention to the rest of the comment. Strength in any form, physical, mental, whatever it maybe, will contribute to the survival of a species.
You must not have paid attention to the rest of the comment. Strength in any form, physical, mental, whatever it maybe, will contribute to the survival of a species.
You are 100% correct, my fault.
Strength in any form, physical, mental, whatever it maybe, will contribute to the survival of a species.
Racism implies extreme dislike or hatred for a race, ethnicity, or nationality.
What Darwin did was take scientific data (impartially), compared his findings, and came up with a solution. This isn't as thorough and complete as it is with modern times, but let me stress something to you. Darwin lived in the 1800s. People didn't exactly have as fond an opinion towards other races as we do now.
Does this imply that Darwin is a racist? No! He said Negro. Big whoop. That was the term back then. What his observations and discoveries yielded did not reflect what he himself thought.
Now please Holt. Make better judgments when creating threads. Consider the thought yourself. Is this thread discussable? Can this be debatable? Can I be objective during these debates? Now that you have learned something, maybe we can move on and hope for better threads in the future. Nice try though!
Now please Holt. Make better judgments when creating threads. Consider the thought yourself. Is this thread discussable? Can this be debatable? Can I be objective during these debates? Now that you have learned something, maybe we can move on and hope for better threads in the future. Nice try though!
It would be nice if you would elaborate. I offered both evedince for him being a racist and not but you seem to have ignored them and posted anyway.
It would be nice if you would elaborate. I offered both evedince for him being a racist and not but you seem to have ignored them and posted anyway.
Basically this thread can't really get anywhere. Debating whether a man who lived 200 years ago was racist based on his scientific theory isn't very easy.
Basically this thread can't really get anywhere. Debating whether a man who lived 200 years ago was racist based on his scientific theory isn't very easy.
Sure it is it's done quite often and it's more about what he said regarding people of other racis.
