|
vmancha
|
|
Posted 05/25/12
|
Reply with quote
#1
|
|
watch
|
|
Loading...
|
|
|
itsallgood
|
|
|
vmancha
|
|
Posted 05/25/12
|
Reply with quote
#3
|
|
Quote: Originally Posted by itsallgood
That is one of the most distortion and dishonest movies ever made.
In your view what was wrong with the film?
|
|
Loading...
|
|
|
itsallgood
|
|
Posted 05/25/12
|
Reply with quote
#4
|
|
Quote: Originally Posted by vmanchaQuote: Originally Posted by itsallgood
That is one of the most movies ever made.
In your view what was wrong with the film?
What part of "distortion and dishonest" did you not get?
Thunderfoots vids cover it well enough.
Personally i found the science = genocide and god = love a joke and anybody who treats that movie with anything but disgust is too far gone to reason with.
Here is the politest review i could find:
Quote: This film is cheerfully ignorant, manipulative, slanted, cherry-picks quotations, draws unwarranted conclusions, makes outrageous juxtapositions (Soviet marching troops representing opponents of ID), pussy-foots around religion (not a single identified believer among the ID people), segues between quotes that are not about the same thing, tells bald-faced lies, and makes a completely baseless association between freedom of speech and freedom to teach religion in a university class that is not about religion.
Actually i should link this thread into the other as it fits quite well into that one.
|
|
Loading...
|
|
|
itsallgood
|
|
Posted 05/25/12
|
Reply with quote
#5
|
|
|
In support of his claim that the theory of evolution inspired Nazism, Ben Stein attributes the following statement to Charles Darwin's book The Descent of Man:[28] With savages, the weak in body or mind are soon eliminated. We civilized men, on the other hand, do our utmost to check the process of elimination. We build asylums for the imbecile, the maimed and the sick. Thus the weak members of civilized societies propagate their kind. No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man. Hardly anyone is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed. The original source shows that Stein has significantly changed the text and meaning of the paragraph, by leaving out whole and partial sentences without indicating that he had done so. The original paragraph (page 168) (words that Stein omitted shown in bold) and the subsequent sentences in the book state:[28][72] With savages, the weak in body or mind are soon eliminated; and those that survive commonly exhibit a vigorous state of health. We civilized men, on the other hand, do our utmost to check the process of elimination. We build asylums for the imbecile, the maimed and the sick; we institute poor-laws; and our medical men exert their utmost skill to save the life of every one to the last moment. There is reason to believe that vaccination has preserved thousands, who from a weak constitution would formerly have succumbed to small-pox. Thus the weak members of civilized societies propagate their kind. No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man. It is surprising how soon a want of care, or care wrongly directed, leads to the degeneration of a domestic race; but excepting in the case of man himself, hardly anyone is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed. The aid which we feel impelled to give to the helpless is mainly an incidental result of the instinct of sympathy, which was originally acquired as part of the social instincts, but subsequently rendered, in the manner previously indicated, more tender and more widely diffused. Nor could we check our sympathy, even at the urging of hard reason, without deterioration in the noblest part of our nature. The surgeon may harden himself whilst performing an operation, for he knows that he is acting for the good of his patient; but if we were intentionally to neglect the weak and helpless, it could only be for a contingent benefit, with an overwhelming present evil.[72][73] According to John Moore writing in the National Post: Stein quotes from a passage in Darwin's writing that appears to endorse the notion that for a species to thrive the infirm must be culled. He omits the part where Darwin insists this would be "evil" and that man's care for the weak is "the noblest part of our nature." When I asked Stein about this on my radio show he deadpanned, "If any Darwin fans are listening and we have misquoted him, we are sorry; we don't mean to diss Darwin."[74] The Expelled Exposed website also points out that the same misleading selective quotation from this passage was used by anti-evolutionist William Jennings Bryan in the 1925 Scopes Trial, but the full passage makes it clear that Darwin was not advocating eugenics. The eugenics movement relied on simplistic and faulty assumptions about heredity, and by the 1920s evolutionary biologists were criticizing eugenics. Clarence Darrow, who defended the teaching of human evolution in the Scopes trial, wrote a scathing repudiation of eugenics.[75] In a supplement to a review of Expelled, J. Kirk Fitzhugh, Research & Collections, Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, cites Darwin's two paragraphs in their entirety, and says that in the context shown by the second paragraph "What we find is that Darwin’s position is diametrically opposed to what Stein intimated."
|
|
Loading...
|
|
|
Matthias
|
|
Posted 05/25/12
|
Reply with quote
#6
|
|
Quote: Originally Posted by itsallgoodThe Expelled Exposed website also points out that the same misleading selective quotation from this passage was used by anti-evolutionist William Jennings Bryan in the 1925 Scopes Trial, but the full passage makes it clear that Darwin was not advocating eugenics. The eugenics movement relied on simplistic and faulty assumptions about heredity, and by the 1920s evolutionary biologists were criticizing eugenics. Clarence Darrow, who defended the teaching of human evolution in the Scopes trial, wrote a scathing repudiation of eugenics. [75]
Indeed. And this wasn't a quirk of the 20s; more recently, the most prominent and scathing critics of latter-day "scientific" racism and pop ep have tended to be atheistic evolutionary theorists.
|
|
Loading...
|
|
|
Damoksta
|
|
Posted 05/25/12
|
Reply with quote
#7
|
|
Quote: Originally Posted by itsallgoodQuote: Originally Posted by vmanchaQuote: Originally Posted by itsallgood
That is one of the most movies ever made.
In your view what was wrong with the film? What part of "distortion and dishonest" did you not get? Thunderfoots vids cover it well enough. Personally i found the science = genocide and god = love a joke and anybody who treats that movie with anything but disgust is too far gone to reason with. Here is the politest review i could find: Quote: This film is cheerfully ignorant, manipulative, slanted, cherry-picks quotations, draws unwarranted conclusions, makes outrageous juxtapositions (Soviet marching troops representing opponents of ID), pussy-foots around religion (not a single identified believer among the ID people), segues between quotes that are not about the same thing, tells bald-faced lies, and makes a completely baseless association between freedom of speech and freedom to teach religion in a university class that is not about religion. Actually i should link this thread into the other as it fits quite well into that one.
This may scare you, but I actually agree with your sentiments in general.
There are ways to discuss intelligent design vs evolution, but I find misinterpreting the other side repugnant. Hitler, for example, is driven more by the ideas of Ubermensch than Darwin's work. And BioLogos Foundation is certainly filled with Christians who theistic evolutionist.
|
|
Loading...
|
|
|
neilfrompta
|
|
Posted 05/25/12
|
Reply with quote
#8
|
|
Anyone who wants to read about the nazis and evolution should read Mein Kampf. It is laden with naturalistic theories. It remains true even if it makes you mad Itsallgood.
It is a fact that the nazis perceived the competition between the species as the same as the competition between the races. Anyone who has read the nazi manifesto can see that and after all the nazi's prided themselves on being the most technologically advance nation in the world.
It is a case study to what science is capable when it forsakes a biblical morality.
|
|
Loading...
|
|
|
CrashTestAuto
|
|
Posted 05/25/12
|
Reply with quote
#9
|
|
|
Yeah, Expelled and Ben Stein actually manage to make ID theorists look bad... which is incredible. Ben Stein is about as dishonest about evolution as it is really possible to be. I don't think I've ever seen him accurately describe the theory, let alone honestly critique it.
vmancha, it is difficult to identify the bad parts of Expelled. It would be faster to identify the sections where someone is being honest, or saying something accurate, but I'm not actually sure there are any.
Seriously, this is part of why people are so hostile towards ID. Even if the science and philosophy worked, the people representing it are so unbelievably dishonest and underhanded in their methods that it is impossible to actually address the arguments.
Ben Stein makes William Lane Craig look like a model of virtue and honesty. I'm harsh on Craig because he claims to be a respected academic, but he is leagues above the Expelled team in terms of honest and irenic discussion of the issues.
|
|
Loading...
|
|
|
jbiemans
|
|
|
Lawlessone777
|
|
Posted 05/25/12
|
Reply with quote
#11
|
|
|
People are questioning the fact that Hitler adopted evolution as a means for the holocaust? Certainly I agree that Ben Stein mischaracterized and overdramatized the hand evolution had in Nazi'ism, but that hand was most assuredly there. Much in the way atheistic interpreters blame religion for war, Stein was blaming Darwinism on things like racial cleansing and eugenics. Now Darwinism most definitely was used as an excuse in those instances, however the argument that the belief system is morally neutral and it's the twisted mind that is truly at fault holds true for both theistic and atheistic blame.
With regards to the movie I actually quite enjoyed it. I get that there were parts that were overdramatized, however I was happy to have Hectar Avalos openly admit theistic bias in his hiring and firing practices. I was also happy to see the open animosity presented by the atheists towards religious believers, which was more the spirit of the film versus outright attacking Darwinism. I certainly don't believe it deserves the foaming at the mouth vitriol I've seen atheists spout towards it. It wasn't exactly fair, but not any less fair than I've seen atheists be in their presentation of religion.
And finally...Thunderfoot? Again, guys, I'm starting to become a bit concerned that a lot of the new atheists that are coming onto this board, while I welcome fresh minds to discuss the topics we hvae here, are coming from the Thunderfoot crowd that essentially has made it their mission statement to outright troll anyone who supports William Lane Craig mindlessly. Thunderfoot is incredibly dishonest, very angry, and doesn't have any interest in actually discussing the reality of this subject; all he wants to do is troll for attention. I think I'm one of the few Christians on this board who actually sat down and watched his videos, and I was genuinely amazed at how willing his atheist fans were to soak up any fallacious argument he made, or blatantly dishonest insult.
|
|
Loading...
|
|
|
Damoksta
|
|
Posted 05/25/12
|
Reply with quote
#12
|
|
Quote: Originally Posted by Lawlessone777 People are questioning the fact that Hitler adopted evolution as a means for the holocaust? Certainly I agree that Ben Stein mischaracterized and overdramatized the hand evolution had in Nazi'ism, but that hand was most assuredly there. Much in the way atheistic interpreters blame religion for war, Stein was blaming Darwinism on things like racial cleansing and eugenics. Now Darwinism most definitely was used as an excuse in those instances, however the argument that the belief system is morally neutral and it's the twisted mind that is truly at fault holds true for both theistic and atheistic blame.\
Believe in Darwinian evolution alone isn't going to convince someone to hasten the death of the undesirables - might give them a superior sense of self being the Master Race maybe, but certainly not going to compel them to build gas chambers. It's Nietzschean moral nihilism that's the ultimate culprit. This is not to ignore Darwinian evolution, but it is certainly not the main cause at all.
Now, one could argue Nietzchean moral nihilism is a logical outlook from atheism, but not all atheists are moral nihilists, some chose to be humanist based on the idea of moral landscape, do-onto-others-what-you-want-others-to-do-to-you, etc. Neither are all atheists strict believers in Darwinian evolution e.g Crick's panspermia theory of origin of life on Earth. And neither are all Christians non-Darwinian Evolutionist, e.g. Francisco Ayala.
Therefore I find imposing the idea of Nazi-ism and atheism to evolution automatically bit... disturbing. It's almost a classic fallacy of appealing to fear.
|
|
Loading...
|
|
|
CrashTestAuto
|
|
Posted 05/25/12
|
Reply with quote
#13
|
|
Quote: Originally Posted by Lawlessone777And finally...Thunderfoot? Again, guys, I'm starting to become a bit concerned that a lot of the new atheists that are coming onto this board, while I welcome fresh minds to discuss the topics we hvae here, are coming from the Thunderfoot crowd that essentially has made it their mission statement to outright troll anyone who supports William Lane Craig mindlessly. Thunderfoot is incredibly dishonest, very angry, and doesn't have any interest in actually discussing the reality of this subject; all he wants to do is troll for attention. I think I'm one of the few Christians on this board who actually sat down and watched his videos, and I was genuinely amazed at how willing his atheist fans were to soak up any fallacious argument he made, or blatantly dishonest insult.
Actually on the science stuff thunderf00t is pretty good. I've criticised his recent stuff, and I don't think he does very well with philosophy or theology (though I wouldn't go so far as to say he does badly). I've also never seen any reason to think he is dishonest.
Regardless, thunderf00t is good at dealing with creationists, and one of many people to rip apart Expelled. The film is horrifically dishonest and misrepresentative throughout. The Darwin quote above being pretty spectacular. The Dawkins interview being a clip that gets played a lot. Most of the presentations of what happened with the firings are either outright lies or inaccurate enough to be a distortion. The holocaust stuff is both a dishonest and frankly twisted abuse of a really horrible historical event.
As I said, I bad mouth Craig, but that's because he needs to be held to a higher standard as an academic and role model. The Expelled guys are actually awful.
|
|
Loading...
|
|
|
Lawlessone777
|
|
Posted 05/25/12
|
Reply with quote
#14
|
|
|
Well with regards to Nazi-isim leading from, or due to, atheism, Darwinism, or Neitchzean nihilism the same path we take from there to racial cleansing is the same path we would take to connect religion to crusades. While both religion and atheism are one of the tools used in either circumstance, it's a culmination of political, personal, and ethnic factors that all are melted into the same pot that cause these kinds of events to transpire.
Heck, Hitler used Christianity, atheism, Darwinism, and science as a reason for the holocaust. To top that off you also have the very ripe political climate of the time that held a very strong disdain for Jews. That political climate was pretty fertile ground for him to work with and start planting the seeds of that kind of atrocity.
There certainly were some good points about Expelled, but the Nazi section wasn't one of them. I was more interested in the prejudice against religious believers in academia.
|
|
Loading...
|
|
|
CrashTestAuto
|
|
Posted 05/25/12
|
Reply with quote
#15
|
|
Quote: Originally Posted by Lawlessone777Well with regards to Nazi-isim leading from, or due to, atheism, Darwinism, or Neitchzean nihilism the same path we take from there to racial cleansing is the same path we would take to connect religion to crusades. While both religion and atheism are one of the tools used in either circumstance, it's a culmination of political, personal, and ethnic factors that all are melted into the same pot that cause these kinds of events to transpire.
Heck, Hitler used Christianity, atheism, Darwinism, and science as a reason for the holocaust. To top that off you also have the very ripe political climate of the time that held a very strong disdain for Jews. That political climate was pretty fertile ground for him to work with and start planting the seeds of that kind of atrocity.
There certainly were some good points about Expelled, but the Nazi section wasn't one of them. I was more interested in the prejudice against religious believers in academia.
Again, don't trust Expelled. Here's a link that deals with each case:
Now, obviously it isn't the most unbiased site, but given the way that Expelled dealt with the holocaust, misquoting Darwin, blatantly misdecribed evolutionary theory, and misrepresented the atheists it interviewed, I know which source I'm more inclined to believe.
|
|
Loading...
|
|