Peter Hitchens

Creationism, Intelligent Design, and Evolution.
ryu238
Regular Poster
Posts: 562
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 3:04 pm

Peter Hitchens

Post by ryu238 » Sun Apr 26, 2015 3:29 am

Ok: http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/ ... odwin.html
The man tries to mention several pages of mein kamph, but one is about cultural evolution. And several others don't quite mention natural selection, at least how it applies to Darwin. Also, he plays the no true Christian Card.

ryu238
Regular Poster
Posts: 562
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 3:04 pm

Re: Peter Hitchens

Post by ryu238 » Sun Apr 26, 2015 10:00 pm

Here is a response I sent him, what do you guys think?
"Hello there mister Hitchens. First, your excuse about "Primitive Darwinism" being not about Darwinism in general is pretty weak. It could just as well refer to the theory being considered Primitive. Second, several of those pages in Mein Kaphf (sorry about the spelling) doesn't talk about evolution in a biological sense since that is what Darwin wrote about. That is just confirmation bias I am afraid.
Third are theses quotes: "Houston Stewart Chamberlain, the original racialist theorist, and one of the prophets of Nazi racial theory, devoted some effort to trying to establish that Jesus was not a Jew. "
"Yet the eugenicists, with their belief in sterilisation of the 'inferior', and the racial theorists, such as Chamberlain, were excited by Darwinism." Except Chamberllain was anti-darwin and inspired by his faith as seen in this link: https://coelsblog.wordpress.com/2011/11 ... darwinism/
This shows how much Hitler and his idols didn't understand Darwin. Also it points out how he was influenced by Martin Luther, the anti-semite founder of Lutherism.
Not to mention Christianity in general: http://www.nobeliefs.com/hitler.htm
http://www.nobeliefs.com/speeches.htm
http://www.nobeliefs.com/hitlerchristian.htm
There are far more quotes of Hitlers beliefs and religious convictions, than what you have found on evolution (and again several of those pages don't talk about it in any Darwinain sense, which I will assume is why you didn't put it in)
"Well, see above for whether Hitler was in fact 'clearly' a Christian, let alone an 'exponent' of Christianity. If this were so, where are the accounts, anywhere, of his attending religious services (apart from patriotic shows such as the famous 1933 gathering at the Garrison Church in Potsdam) and the pictures of him leaving church portals after Mass?" Considering my links I assume you never bothered lookin mr.Hitchens. you are sadly not your brother. Here is some more to chew on:
http://theatheistconservative.com/2010/ ... tholicism/
http://www.nobeliefs.com/HitlerSources.htm
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cesare_Orsenigo
http://www.nobeliefs.com/nazis.htm
How do you know that this is just propaganda after reading all this? Because his ideas as a Christain were different from yours? There are many examples of prominent Christians who denounced religions who opposed their own personal beliefs. Indeed, Martin Luther who was once a Catholic monk, denounced the Catholic hierarchy as the work of the anti-Christ and establised by the Devil [Against the Papacy established by the Devil (1545)]. Yet I have yet to see a Lutheran accuse Luther as being a non-Christian. The history of Christianity is filled with examples of people of differing Christian faiths denouncing each other. There are many Christians who have denounced all forms of religious organizations, yet they have a strong belief in God and Jesus Christ. This is what happens with Beliefs, not objective fact like what Darwinism is supposed to be.
So your excuse was the no true Scotsman...or no true Christian approach.
Clearly, Hitler had no scientific sophistication or an understanding of Darwin's theory of evolution and his "blood-line" explanation of human "progress" reveals a Biblical view, not a Darwinian view. He did, however, at times express ideas, not from Darwin, but rather from Herbert Spencer's concept of Social Darwinism, which has little to do with natural selection and served as an adjunct to his already established religious views. Spencer's Social Darwinism tried to connect Darwin's biological theory with the field of social relations. The result of Social Darwinism resulted in many eugenics programs that began in America and adopted by the Nazis. [Note that Darwin never expressed the idea that natural selection could extend from biological systems to social systems.]
http://evilution-is-good-for-you.blogsp ... in_03.html
Darwin himself never supported eugenics: https://sensuouscurmudgeon.wordpress.co ... nd-darwin/
So saying its his fault when he was misinterpreted is kinda underhanded.
Personally I think it was a combination of Christianity, specifically Lutherism, and the is-ought problems in regards towards natural selection that caused the problem especially since Darwin himself believed that natural selection gave rise towards our alutristism, see kin selection. Not to mention in his works he was especially against eugenics, and did not believe that one race of man was superior to another (usually if it looked like it was, he was reffering to culture and nothing innate in the biology). Its a severe misappropriation that ignores the other, and religious causes."

ryu238
Regular Poster
Posts: 562
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 3:04 pm

Re: Peter Hitchens

Post by ryu238 » Thu May 14, 2015 2:45 am

Here is a quote from the article:
There are further mentions of evolution as assumed truth on p.245, 248, 249, 365, 471 and 530 (I have omitted one or two uses of the expression in a purely political sense, though these too would tend to suggest that Hitler accepted it as a scientific fact)
I should note that some of these pages don't mention evolution like he thinks it does.