Leftists often reject Darwinism when applied to humans, as it seems to imply our nature is fixed and flawed. But this is a mistake, as several prominent leftists have argued.
"Due to its odious past, no politician of any ideological stripe would engage with policy proposals besmirched by the dread term ‘eugenic’ — Lindt’s proposal is therefore a non-starter."
Uhh...Lindt's thought experiment sounds an awful lot like "gender-affirming care", which disproportionately harms those with mental health comorbidities, autism and histories of abuse. Democrat politicians are "engaging" with this wholeheartedly.
I have to disagree with your take on abortion; most of the strong emotions for and against abortion is amongst women than men. Most men in the developed world never think "how can I force women to have children?" The modern problem isn't a patriarchal desire to have women "barefoot, pregnant, and in the kitchen" but an increasing reluctance of men to marry women and sire children, since it's seen as very likely to end in paying alimony and/or child support.
The thing is that a lot of psychology experiments have shown that people can be made artificially cruel through subservience to peer pressure (Solomon Asch and Milgram experiments where people would press a buzzer and shock someone when they are told). Therefore we should not be led to believe that competition is somehow innate and egalitarian cooperation has to be socially enforced. Both are equally susceptible to social conditioning.
Leftist's, despite their many flaws, are right in not wanting people to be made artificially cruel towards those below them in the social hierarchy.
"Take the chapter on eugenics (the idea of selectively breeding humans to improve their genetic quality)."
That phraseology 'selectively breeding humans' is a big problem. While I am a strong advocate of embryo selection and genetic enhancement. I would only support it as a voluntary situation.
"The moment we stop asking questions for fear of the answers, we consciously blind ourselves and destroy one of the greatest assets we have as a species: our intellectual curiosity."
That is a very profound statement.
"Given the US Supreme Court’s recent rejection of the constitutional right to abortion, Hrdy’s quarter-century-old warning appears remarkably prescient."
The SCOTUS found that there is no 'constitutional right to abortion', not that it should be illegal. It was rightly left up to the states.
Most leftists, rightists, and many of the rest have an extreme inability to accept reality.
What’s the term used to describe someone who notices the similarity in the surnames all of these so-called public intellectuals? Hmm. Must be just a coincidence. Must be.
It’s worth pointing out that the “racial science” of the Nazis was NOT based on Darwinism. They firmly opposed Darwinism, the Nazi conception of biology and of race was creationist.
Yes, I believe that a rejection of biology is one of the key weaknesses of the ideological Left. Any worldview that does not rest on solid foundations cannot survive a confrontation with reality. The Left will never be able to improve society without accepting the constraints of factors such as geography, energy, and biology.
I think one needs to start with a few key propositions
1) The differences between humans and non-human animals are largely determined by genetics.
2) The characteristics that humans hold in common are largely determined by genetics.
3) The differences between individuals within the same society are largely determined by genetics.
That is why the goal of the Left to achieve Equality of Outcome is doomed to fail:
Use of the label "Leftist" is a dated strawmen which allows the echo chamber here to become a safe place for peeps who are triggered by skin pigmentation, while thinking they are above average, and for whom evolution means they are right about this in their anti-vaxxer gated community of sovereign citizens who do shamanic yoga, and ignore the thought that Homo sp. became such because we began policing narcissism in the long ages of the paleolithic and creating a world in which primitive primate hierarchies look ridiculous. The evolution continues, but recidivists and narcissistic parasites are still among us on the both "right" and the "left" let them be: Boris Johnston, Donald Trump, Keven Rudd, Scott Morrison, Benjamin "Bibi" Netanyahu, Vladimir Putin. The end of history was eaten up by our failure to deal with narcissists. The sideshow here on aporia is witness to a capitulation to the lazy thought that allows narcissists to destroy what we have all made, each and every, and 'worlded' into society, by negotiating in good faith and not calling each other names, and calling out the names of those who should have been policed before adulthood. Not dealing with narcissism is an aporia. narcihttps://www.academia.edu/40978261/Why_we_should_an_introduction_by_memoir_into_the_implications_of_the_Egalitarian_Revolution_of_the_Paleolithic_or_Anyone_for_cake
This whole article is dumb. The Right don't uniformly believe in Creationism. And for those who do, it's just a religious belief, with few policy implications.
It's the Left that denies reality (of human evolution) and wants to change EVERYTHING based on that
"Stalinist Russia, Maoist China, Khmer Rouge Cambodia, plus the dismal history of failed ‘egalitarian’ revolutions the world over"??
I don't know about Stalin's or the Khmer Rouge's revolutions, but Mao's was neither egalitarian nor a failure. It was and is the successful China you see today.
It’s not that they specifically ignore Darwin and other forms of evidence: they are in a cult of self-affirmation and their messiah is Marx. They will devolve everything to that. It’s an article of faith
"Due to its odious past, no politician of any ideological stripe would engage with policy proposals besmirched by the dread term ‘eugenic’ — Lindt’s proposal is therefore a non-starter."
Uhh...Lindt's thought experiment sounds an awful lot like "gender-affirming care", which disproportionately harms those with mental health comorbidities, autism and histories of abuse. Democrat politicians are "engaging" with this wholeheartedly.
I have to disagree with your take on abortion; most of the strong emotions for and against abortion is amongst women than men. Most men in the developed world never think "how can I force women to have children?" The modern problem isn't a patriarchal desire to have women "barefoot, pregnant, and in the kitchen" but an increasing reluctance of men to marry women and sire children, since it's seen as very likely to end in paying alimony and/or child support.
Women: "how can I make this about me?"
The left are nothing but spiteful mutants. They cannot be reasoned with. The left must be subjugated seriously.
The thing is that a lot of psychology experiments have shown that people can be made artificially cruel through subservience to peer pressure (Solomon Asch and Milgram experiments where people would press a buzzer and shock someone when they are told). Therefore we should not be led to believe that competition is somehow innate and egalitarian cooperation has to be socially enforced. Both are equally susceptible to social conditioning.
Leftist's, despite their many flaws, are right in not wanting people to be made artificially cruel towards those below them in the social hierarchy.
"Take the chapter on eugenics (the idea of selectively breeding humans to improve their genetic quality)."
That phraseology 'selectively breeding humans' is a big problem. While I am a strong advocate of embryo selection and genetic enhancement. I would only support it as a voluntary situation.
"The moment we stop asking questions for fear of the answers, we consciously blind ourselves and destroy one of the greatest assets we have as a species: our intellectual curiosity."
That is a very profound statement.
"Given the US Supreme Court’s recent rejection of the constitutional right to abortion, Hrdy’s quarter-century-old warning appears remarkably prescient."
The SCOTUS found that there is no 'constitutional right to abortion', not that it should be illegal. It was rightly left up to the states.
Most leftists, rightists, and many of the rest have an extreme inability to accept reality.
What’s the term used to describe someone who notices the similarity in the surnames all of these so-called public intellectuals? Hmm. Must be just a coincidence. Must be.
It’s worth pointing out that the “racial science” of the Nazis was NOT based on Darwinism. They firmly opposed Darwinism, the Nazi conception of biology and of race was creationist.
Yes, I believe that a rejection of biology is one of the key weaknesses of the ideological Left. Any worldview that does not rest on solid foundations cannot survive a confrontation with reality. The Left will never be able to improve society without accepting the constraints of factors such as geography, energy, and biology.
I think one needs to start with a few key propositions
1) The differences between humans and non-human animals are largely determined by genetics.
2) The characteristics that humans hold in common are largely determined by genetics.
3) The differences between individuals within the same society are largely determined by genetics.
That is why the goal of the Left to achieve Equality of Outcome is doomed to fail:
https://frompovertytoprogress.substack.com/p/why-achieving-equality-is-an-impossible
Fortunately, there is a better option: material progress and upward mobility:
https://frompovertytoprogress.substack.com/p/why-progress-and-upward-mobility
Use of the label "Leftist" is a dated strawmen which allows the echo chamber here to become a safe place for peeps who are triggered by skin pigmentation, while thinking they are above average, and for whom evolution means they are right about this in their anti-vaxxer gated community of sovereign citizens who do shamanic yoga, and ignore the thought that Homo sp. became such because we began policing narcissism in the long ages of the paleolithic and creating a world in which primitive primate hierarchies look ridiculous. The evolution continues, but recidivists and narcissistic parasites are still among us on the both "right" and the "left" let them be: Boris Johnston, Donald Trump, Keven Rudd, Scott Morrison, Benjamin "Bibi" Netanyahu, Vladimir Putin. The end of history was eaten up by our failure to deal with narcissists. The sideshow here on aporia is witness to a capitulation to the lazy thought that allows narcissists to destroy what we have all made, each and every, and 'worlded' into society, by negotiating in good faith and not calling each other names, and calling out the names of those who should have been policed before adulthood. Not dealing with narcissism is an aporia. narcihttps://www.academia.edu/40978261/Why_we_should_an_introduction_by_memoir_into_the_implications_of_the_Egalitarian_Revolution_of_the_Paleolithic_or_Anyone_for_cake
This whole article is dumb. The Right don't uniformly believe in Creationism. And for those who do, it's just a religious belief, with few policy implications.
It's the Left that denies reality (of human evolution) and wants to change EVERYTHING based on that
Selectively breeding humans? When do we get the Kwisatz Haderach?
"Stalinist Russia, Maoist China, Khmer Rouge Cambodia, plus the dismal history of failed ‘egalitarian’ revolutions the world over"??
I don't know about Stalin's or the Khmer Rouge's revolutions, but Mao's was neither egalitarian nor a failure. It was and is the successful China you see today.
“Origins of the myth of social Darwinism: The ambiguous legacy of Richard Hofstadter’s Social Darwinism in American Thought”https://www.princeton.edu/~tleonard/papers/myth.pdf
It’s not that they specifically ignore Darwin and other forms of evidence: they are in a cult of self-affirmation and their messiah is Marx. They will devolve everything to that. It’s an article of faith
I am much more relaxed in urban areas when I rely on my hard wired visceral instincts to detect potential predators.
A sloppy left wing academic treatise in my pocket would probably fare rather badly against said predators.
An interesting piece folks !