• emergencyfood@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        Evolutionary biology is definitely no basis for a system of morality. But I must say, as a biologist who studied evolution, that social Darwinism is not based either on evolutionary theory or empirical evidence. The idea that evolution is driven solely by competitive ability is pseudoscience, and works neither in human nor animal populations.

        • gapbetweenus@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I wrote it further down, ist based on very basic understanding of evolution (happen to have studied biology myself) and sure, like any other moral system it’s not based on any empirical evidence.

      • jet@hackertalks.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Oh agreed! 100%!! Evolution has no morality baked into it just efficaciousness.

          • jet@hackertalks.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            It may not be the happiest way to go but I think it’s the only self-consistent way to go.

            As an individual I totally believe in making the world a better place, do unto others as that you would have them do unto you, all of that. But in the scenario where the world’s going to end unless one dude sacrifices themselves, I would say basic instinct kicks in. The tribe must survive!

            • gapbetweenus@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              I hope you just pretend that you don’t know what social Darwinism is and how applying it worked out in the end.

              • jet@hackertalks.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                I’m aware of it, and I’ve made no statements along those lines. I think it’s disingenuous to conflate my statements of evolution and the question of one sacrifice for the good of the world, to social Darwinism.

                • gapbetweenus@feddit.de
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Social Darwinism is what you get by applying basic understanding of evolution to moral questions - exactly what you have been doing. It’s really not that complicated. As a moral construct it only leads to suffering since it lacks any empathy.

      • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        You know Darwin himself was against the idea. He argued that our ability to look after one another was one of the most vital parts of being human and we can’t save humanity by giving up our humanity.