There are clear iq and physical differences between races

[PerciFlage]

Rick (I'm on my phone now, and quoting really is a pain), I think you might be confusing a description of a state of affairs with approval of that state of affairs, at least with some of those quotations. For example the quotation from the other thread which you said sounded like adbocating genocide (to paraphrase: "at some point in the near future, the civilized races will almost certainly exterminate the savages), to me reads like Darwin is lamenting a future which he sees as inevitable, not suggesting that people should work towards that future. This is even more clear in the full version of the quotation, which if not included in neo's post upthread I will post when I get to a computer.

That post of Neo's contains a lot of what I was talking about in my earlier response to you. Darwin unquestionably said and wrote things which raise red flags to a modern audience, but judged on the totality of his words and works I just don't see a compelling case for him being a racist.

[RickD]

PerciFlage wrote:

Rick (I'm on my phone now, and quoting really is a pain), I think you might be confusing a description of a state of affairs with approval of that state of affairs, at least with some of those quotations. For example the quotation from the other thread which you said sounded like adbocating genocide (to paraphrase: "at some point in the near future, the civilized races will almost certainly exterminate the savages), to me reads like Darwin is lamenting a future which he sees as inevitable, not suggesting that people should work towards that future. This is even more clear in the full version of the quotation, which if not included in neo's post upthread I will post when I get to a computer.

I agree with you about that quote. I certainly haven't read anything so far from Darwin that has lead me to believe he advocated violence against those he believed were of a lesser race. As a matter of fact, I'm seeing that Darwin had both grandfathers(I believe) who were staunch abolitionists. And I believe they deeply influenced Darwin in that regard.

That post of Neo's contains a lot of what I was talking about in my earlier response to you. Darwin unquestionably said and wrote things which raise red flags to a modern audience, but judged on the totality of his words and works I just don't see a compelling case for him being a racist.

That's fine. Many others agree with you.

On another note, I had a nice conversation with a guy I worked with, about Nathan B. Forrest being a racist. He was adamant that he wasn't a racist. While my research showed beyond doubt to me, that he was a horrible violent racist. I had and have no dog in the fight. While my coworker had an obvious to me bias. He grew up in a somewhat racially segregated south, and attended Nathan B. Forrest high school. So, my point is only that two intelligent people can disagree, depending on their perspective.

If evolution and all it entails proves to be true, then so be it. Only time and scientific discoveries will show one way or another. It's my opinion that recent discoveries fit nicely into the progressive creation model. But, I'm not so dogmatic to claim PC is a fact.

[PerciFlage]

If evolution and all it entails proves to be true, then so be it. Only time and scientific discoveries will show one way or another. It's my opinion that recent discoveries fit nicely into the progressive creation model. But, I'm not so dogmatic to claim PC is a fact.

I don't think that any scientific discovery necessarily entails a particular moral philosophy. I can see how evolutionary theory could be used by someone to justify racism^*, but I can also see how it could be used to justify treating all people equitably.^** Any moral interpretation of a scientific theory depends to a far greater extent on the worldview of the person doing the interpreting than it does on the science itself.

It's comparable to when people try and write off religion by saying that it leads to violence and bigotry, usually by highlighting the examples of 9/11 and the Crusades. It really grinds my gears when people do this, as it is incredibly sloppy and lazy thinking. Religion is one of many, many things that people use to justify war and other violence, but there are vanishingly few examples where religion is the ultimate or dominant cause of the violence.

Could I ask for an example or two of recent discoveries that fit into the progressive creation model?

* Because by one interpretation you could divide species, sub-species, races and individuals into winners and losers

** Because by another interpretation it shows that humans aren't just similar, but that we all share the very same blood.

[Philip]

his creation shows that he is logical and efficient; to others he may appear whimsical. Perhaps he is neither.

Hugh, His logic is not OUR logic. He is efficient to His purposes and timing - which we can't necessarily see.

So often I see on Discovery or a similar channel awesome programs on the animal world, the oceans, the stars and universe, etc - and I so much of the great beauty and and His creations just make me realize how cool, inventive and beautiful is the mind of God. So many scientists on these shows think the results of His Creation are awesome and cool, breathtaking and mysterious, often spending their entire careers trying to deduce the nuances of one or a few of such marvels, but so many of them just think all these wonders appeared by time and chance. Sad. And illogical.

[Revolutionary]

I always find this wonderful about the brain, intelligence isn't exactly genetic.... When we examine the brain, we have primary (responsible for base function), secondary and tertiary convolutions.... I'm not going to spend the time looking it up, but I believe that tertiary convolutions develop well into the first year of a child's life.

Generally we make the assumption that intelligent people have intelligent babies, but intelligent parents tend to spend the time, provide the stimuli and nurturing aspect that aids in the development of brain 'firing' which maps out the development of convolutions.

We are so unfulfilled in our daily expression chasing our tails round and round for foolish tokens of worth, it's hard to say what impact we could have on our offspring in brain development from womb all the way into the first year.

Even our self proclaimed intellectuals lack the knowledge that we are so stifled within the assessment of worth, every field of thought is barely scratching upon the surface of it's potential.... I'm about as sharp as they come, which means I know full well that I know nothing. My only possible focus that doesn't involve peacock-ing, has to be investing my time in freeing humanity from it's stifling assessments of worth.

I've always wondered, if the fulfillment of expression unhindered was capable of eliminating every genetic flaw from within our form.... That would be a rather brilliant aspect, certainly how I would design it.