I listed numerous examples of such comparisons being made by prominent ID advocates like Jonathan Wells, William Dembski, John Calvert, Mark Hartwig and Phillip Johnson.
Anyone opposed to the usual Darwinian attempts at "biological thinking" (instead of thinking through and about biology) should make such comparisons for sound historical reasons, lest history repeat itself. For example, biology as a mask for the urge to merge:
Biological thinking in Nazism:(The Nazi Doctors: Medical
“And they were all doctors like me, who tried to think biologically, biology as the foundation of medical thought. . . . We didn’t want politics—we were critical of politics—but [concerned} with the way human beings really are—not just an idea or philosophy.”
National Socialism as Applied Biology:
The nation would now be run according to what Johann S. and his cohorts considered biological truth, “the way human beings really are.” That is why he had a genuine “eureka” experience—a sense of “That’s exactly it!”—when he heard Rudolf Hess declare National Socialism to be “nothing but applied biology” (see page 31). Dr. S. felt himself merged...
Killing and the
Psychology of Genocide
By Robert Jay Lifton :129) (Emphasis added)
Is it really a brute "scientific fact" at issue or did the little fellow just like feeling merged to overcome the "Jewish influence" of alienation? It seems that all that is essential and conceptual is alienating for some little fellows. They are the true believers in so-called "natural selection" like the Nazis Klebold and Harris.
As one put it:
Our whole cultural life for decades has been more or less under the influence of biological thinking, as it was begun particularly around the middle of the last century, by the teachings of Darwin...(Hitler’s Professors: The Part of Scholarship in
Germany’s Crimes Against the Jewish People
By Max Weinreich
(New York:The Yiddish Scientific Institute, 1946) :33) (Emphasis added)
All these who only think that they are thinking about biology often begin running with the Herd, naturally! They usually like to murmur about science and imagine little historical narratives about things to play pretend that they are engaging in scientific reasoning. Yet Darwinists specifically simply cannot seem to engage in conceptual thinking because they are usually trying to engage in "biological thinking" instead. That leads to a scholarship of this form:
The scholars whom we shall quote in such impressive numbers, like those others who were instrumental in any other part of the German pre-war and war efforts, were to a large extent people of long and high standing, university professors and academy members, some of them world famous, authors with familiar names and guest lecturers abroad...(Ib. :7)(Emphasis added)
If the products of their research work, even apart from their rude tone, strike us as unconvincing and hollow, this weakness is due not to inferior training but to the mendacity inherent in any scholarship that overlooks or openly repudiates all moral and spiritual values and, by standing order, knows exactly its ultimate conclusions well in advance.
Anyone who has debated those trying to prop up the Darwinian creation myth these days knows that the apt summary of this historian matches Darwinian reasoning, which is often based more on a repudiation of the spiritual than actual evidence. Indeed, Darwinists sometimes say that their repudiation of the spiritual in negative theology is their best evidence. Those with the urge to merge often try to engage in the same forms of unreasonable reasoning to this day.
On the other hand, anyone comparing those who tend to oppose those supporting Darwinian "reasoning"/imagining or "biological thinking" to Holocaust deniers has probably never debated a Holocaust denier. Try it sometime, it's probably more useful when it comes to knowledge than imagining little histories that often degenerate into mythological narratives of naturalism based on a wave of the hand and the mystical magic of millions of years ago.
[Edit: I was busy tonight, busy! So I didn't get much done with blogging.]
No comments:
Post a Comment