Skip to main content

View Diary: MORE prominent Christians COOL with Evolution (and a little on why we don't hear about them) (143 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Well... (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    dirkster42, Matthias, Kevskos, JosephK74

    ... the father of eugenics, Frances Galton, took evolution in some directions that have been widely discredited. A more modern view (since evolution has undergone at least a half-dozen revolutions since Darwin) would point out that genetic diversity across a population is a good thing because it's difficult to predict a priori which traits might be adaptive over hundreds of generations. A molecular biologist would point out that the classifications of race used by the U.S. Census have no genetic justification because the genetic analysis identifies three clades in modern Africa and only one for the rest of the world. The behaviorist contemporaries of Galton were no less influenced by Darwin, and pointed out that eugenics only works if you can establish that socio-economic status is a genetic trait rather than an environmental one.

    •  It had little to do with socio-economics (0+ / 0-)

      and more to do with biological fitness.

      Have some peanut butter....Romney's toast.

      by rosabw on Thu Nov 01, 2012 at 10:31:25 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Pardon? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Kevskos

        Eugenics certainly had a lot to do with socioeconomic status since the whole thesis was that low socioeconomic status was a genetic problem and therefore should be fixed by limiting reproduction among the lower classes.

        Other biologists took a look at the same theory and criticized the assumption that socioeconomic status was actually correlated to biological fitness.  

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site