Darwin Laws May Save The Economy and Human Race
Interesting Opinion From India: … this country needs Darwin Laws. If defense counsel can demonstrate that the harm to the plaintiff was done pro-actively because the plaintiff is stupid, then the case should be dismissed.
Think of how much better this nation would be if the government stops wasting time on lawsuits brought about by people being stupid. Plus, dumb people will die off, or at least we will be able to tell who they are by their scars. And businesses can spend less time and effort and resources trying to keep idiots safe, and redirect those resources to making better products that can compete in the world market. And finally, people with great ideas who are afraid of bringing them to market because they might get sued into oblivion can rest assured and maybe innovate some great products.
Darwin’s Natural Selection Law suggests increased intelligence sometimes increases survival and reproduction. In every generation some individuals survive and reproduce better than others. Their genes multiply.
Without discussing evolution, it appears the more todays societies nurture ignorance, the faster they will fail. Nurturing ignorance is an offshoot of humanitarian-ism. Has civilization gone too far? Nature culls the weak and inadequate. Humans nurture the weak and inadequate. Human attempts to cull have resulted in horrible atrocities because politics and religion have been the justifying criteria for mass murder. There must be a reasonable compromise without encouraging a “Nanny Society” that promotes Learned helplessness.
Natural Design isn’t always compatible with “Intelligent Design”
An atheist before Darwin could have said, following Hume: ‘I have no explanation for complex biological design. All I know is that God isn’t a good explanation, so we must wait and hope that somebody comes up with a better one.’ I can’t help feeling that such a position, though logically sound, would have left one feeling pretty unsatisfied, and that although atheism might have been logically tenable before Darwin, Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist.
…Richard Dawkins.
A “Nanny Society” cannot and should not protect the terminally stupid. Society needs protection from terminally stupid acts.
Trackbacks
- Darwin Laws May Save The Economy and Human Race
- Temporary Test Blog » Blog Archive » Darwin Laws May Save The Economy and Human Race
Comments are closed.
TruthHugger 
I am honored by your visit and thank you for your honesty. Your article was provocative enough to plant a seed for conversation or debate. That association with Eugenics was a natural segway. Poor old Darwin was just following a thread of scientific study. Sick most of the time while stuck on the creaky Beagle for 5 years, his geologic survey evolved from geology and fossils into development of his controversial theory. Darwin could never have imagined the debate would travel through time and morph into what we see today. I cannot find any reference where Darwin would have considered Eugenics. Eugenics is an excuse for bypassing human consciousness.
Life is study. If you don’t learn, you are not conscious. Humans delude themselves that they can learn faster than mother nature can teach. Such is our downfall. Whatever higher power chooses to take responsibility for our creation must be scratching their head at what they wrought.
Thank you for your insight. I will think about Ben Stein’s movie … I am not a fan of his.
As the author of the original article, I can say it was mostly in jest. But I want to point out, I wasn’t commenting on the state of affairs in India. I am in the United States. Yes, the site is dailyindia.com (a friend’s site, who is Indian) so it’s an easy mistake. But I have no idea how such things are handled in India.
So, Bosskitty, your point is very well-taken… eugenics has Darwinism at its root. It’s a sad state of affairs, but I think it’s poignant to note that we, as a race, do not yet have enough information or capacity to understand all of the complexities of life. So, whereas Darwinism may be innocent as a root, it is the pure hubris involved in eugenics that makes it so evil and unworkable. To think that we, as humans, can manipulate the basis of life to our own benefit carries a monumental amount of chutzpah.
As for me, I am of the mind that “Intelligent Design” isn’t all that wrong a thought. At least at our current understanding, it is so difficult for us to truly know what is what, so it is okay to have a box labeled “and then some magic happens” somewhere in the current roadmap of the study of life. And as we gain more knowledge, we can attach greater understanding to the phenomena around us. And in the process, get closer to God, or whatever your idea/belief is in the nature of the universe.
BTW, I just saw Ben Stein’s “Expelled” movie last weekend. Good stuff for those that are interested. It doesn’t get very deep into the theories of ID and pure Darwinism, but it is a great exposition on the thoughts and politics surrounding those that debate them.
-Mike
Opit#1, Thank you for catching on. I was concerned. So far, I haven’t hooked any neocons to battle with. As for micro-managing social structure, religions have done a stellar job of compartmentalizing behavior. This appeared to have worked, as long as travel and social interaction was limited to a few hundred miles from home. Now that the globe is mingling its occupants, we are experiencing the results of micro-managed cultures, in the name of religion and political theory. We are in the painful transition of evolving into a global culture. This man-made transition is threatening to reduce the population of earth by half, or worse. Darwin had the unfortunate experience of unintended consequence. He sparked the ire of the religion, but ignited scientific intellectuals to question accepted religious rhetoric, with boldness. I never finished Darwin’s book. I admit to bogging down in the minutiae. I see patterns and develop concepts after researching a subject. Earth is experiencing the clash of utopias. Look for this title soon, because you have inspired me to write about this.
I left commenting on your answer because I was trying to find the historical links in British history of the 18th century dealing with Pope, Arbuthnot, and the origins of intelligence feeding media disinformation to the public. Perhaps unsurprisingly, Google and Yahoo were useless.
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/RichLowry/2007/05/24/the_war_on_military_history
was not what I expected to pop up ! If you also check ” Moving the Overton Window” – yep, the links are posted – you should see a pattern that, when coupled with media control, regulates the very content of public discourse into irrelevancy.
I even ran into an online squib yesterday that rated my blog as among the “most disruptive” : a clear sign that I’m finding the content that pierces the narrative. Gee ; I’m finding it here !
I must say I was caught off-balance by what seemed a total contradiction to your usual opinions and style.
As for the other, some might be naive enough to think they could pull off an impersonation because people don’t have much to go on when i.d.’ing each other online.
‘Micro-managing’ goes way back as a cause of much grief in Vietnam.
If you’ve read “The Voyage of the Beagle” – a recommended idea – you may be aware that the so-called “Evolution” confrontation was going on hot and heavy a full century before loyal churchman Charles Darwin arrived on the scene, much distressed that his account was causing attacks on the Church.
I will call you Opit#1 because I know you are not from China and don’t have a political bug up your ass, I could not resist this story. The author was complaining about the lawsuit situation in India, he brought up some points that I hear from US neocons. I wanted to take the premise from individuals to their behavior. I believe stupid behavior is nurtured by socio-political trends that put government in charge of micro-managing personal behavior and removing personal responsibility. Some parts of society have learned to take advantage of this condition and make a living taking advantage of this system to deliberately cause litigious events. Classic insurance scam syndrome. I made the Eugenics comparison to see if anyone made the connection. I’m not surprised that Opit#1 was the first to catch on.
Eugenics was the contentious “theory” which was used to back the idea of the Aryan Race, wasn’t it ? I wouldn’t say the U.S. has much experience in running a “Nanny society” either. Who pissed in your corn flakes ?