Many of our legal and ethical principles depend on the separation between Homo sapiens and all other species. Of the people who regard abortion as a sin, including the minority who go to the lengths of assassinating doctors and blowing up abortion clinics, many are unthinking meat-eaters, [Edit, it is worth thinking about such a sacrifice, just not the way that he does as one who is blind to the sacred.] and have no worries about chimpanzees being imprisoned in zoos and ["]sacrificed["] in laboratories. Would they think again, if we could lay out a living continuum of intermediates between ourselves and chimpanzees linked in an unbroken chain of interbreeders like the Californian salamanders? Surely they would.(The Ancestor's Tale: A Pilgrimage to the Dawn of Evolution
By Richard Dawkins :303)
At least he said the "minority" who blow up abortion clinics, as for all the millions of people who disagree with abortion the clinics do not seem to be blowing up left and right. Given that the little fellow seems to play loose with facts often enough and is also easily "overwhelmed" by evidence apparently drawn from little more than his own blurred imagination (pg. 13) it is good that he makes at least some distinctions and separations in his text. Back to it: "Would they think again, if we could lay out a living continuum of intermediates..." We already have historical examples of people who believed in the Darwinian creation myth to look to in order to find out what Homo sapiens tend to think about human rights, animal wrongs, or human wrongs that seem right in an animal sense when placed in a Darwinian milieu.
For example, the Nazis believed in Darwinism and it permeated their worldview. They did "think again" so to speak, although their form of thought was really just the nonsense of trying to engage in "biological thinking" instead of thinking philosophically about and through biology. Given their worldview they began to gradually treat humans as animals and animals as human. So on the one hand they passed anti-vivisection laws (i.e. animal rights legislation) and promoted vegetarianism, while on the other they sought to breed humans, even going so far as to use human products as if they were animal products for their convenience.
A book briefly notes this "unexpected" turn in history:
The first chapter of Part One is perhaps the strongest of the entire volume. Here, Munro skillfully compiles a social history of animal rights activism within the United Kingdom, the United States, and Australia, the spatial bounds of his study. This summary incorporates a range of components...and even a brief reflection on the unexpected vegetarianism and animal protectionist stances of...the Nazi German’s ideologies.(Compassionate Beasts: The Quest for Animal Rights
By Lyle Munro
Review by Suzanne R. Goodney
Contemporary Sociology, Vol. 31, No. 6. (Nov., 2002) :763) (See also: The Implications of Nazi Animal Protection)
Note Dawkin's excretions, these artifacts of his biological feeelings that give the illusion of sight and insight: "...many are unthinking meat-eaters, and have no worries about chimpanzees being imprisoned in zoos and sacrificed in laboratories."
How does one "sacrifice" an animal in a lab, anyway? Does he believe that scientists set up a little altar for each rat that they test? It seems that Dawkin's proto-Nazi worldview is of the type that seems to make sense to those easily wowed by charlatans of his sort. It is a worldview that seems to lead to more systematic forms of sense, knowledge and scientia at first, yet was really just nonsense all along and goes against science in the end.
Note the unrepentant immanence that was based on the rejection of the Word which perverted biology or "science" into a total worldview, i.e. a religion:
The German doctrine of blood and soil led, however, to systematic torture of the Jewish people over a period of years, inevitably ending in horrible death. Such seemingly impossible conduct resulted from distortion and exaggeration of the stereotype of the Jew in order to heighten the German prestige, from sexual aberrations*, from innate brutality, and above all from a great hatred against the Bible—”a book of pimps and traitors” as the Nazis expressed it. They made a mockery of concepts such as justice, piety, conscience—in brief, everything that raises man above the level of witless beasts.(Political and Civil Life
The Jews under the Nazi Regime
By J. F. Krop
Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 245, The Netherlands during German Occupation. (May, 1946), pp. 28) (Emphasis added)
I say that Dawkins is a mental retard not as an insult but because his mind is retarded by biological thinking, which itself seems to be more of a physical feeling than a metaphysical thought or concept. That's why I call it the urge to merge. It's a shame to see such a mind wasted into the textual degeneracy typical to Darwinism but that's the way it is.
It has been popular among those with the urge to merge to compare ID types to Holocaust deniers. Dawkins himself apparently said: “How should one respond to ID proponents? Dawkins’s first impulse would be to take those who confront him with that view and throw them out of the lecture hall — exactly as one would do to students of history who question the Holocaust.”(Uncommon Descent)
Isn't it ironic, such a mind has been so twisted in on itself that it most likely cannot recognize that censorship is the Nazi way and go from there to question why censorship is its first reaction, with abuse of Jews for an associative argument and emotional conditioning being its second reaction. Apparently there is no form of proto-Nazi scientism that Dawkins will not willingly go along with given his apparent urge to smother himself in the tittles of Mommy Nature.
*Notice how the "sexual aberrations" typical to the Nazis recieve little mention these days. That indicates how sucessful identity politics and emotional conditioning can be on people that are not "raised above the level of witless beasts."
[Related posts: A rabbi on animals, humans and things...
Right2Left revisited
Keeping up with a mental retard...
Specified Complexity]
No comments:
Post a Comment