The World's Largest Coalition of Nontheists and Nontheist Communities!

Reason VS Survival of the Fittest

Oft times we nontheists focus on the dangers of religious ideologies. However, there exists within atheism a potential for hate that rivals the bloodiest of religious fanatics. I am talking of 'survival of the fittest.' Evolution itself is predicated on the idea that we have evolved to our current biology as a means to make us superior to other species in the world. This is a fact of nature but need it be a fact of human interaction? Richard Dawkins believes it a terrible idea to base society on survival of the fittest. I have to agree. But there persists a rhetoric that states that different races have evolved differently. For instance, there is this idea that the African American has evolved superior physical abilities whereas the European has evolved a superior mental ability. While Hitler and his ilk may have been of a Christian persuasion and used it to preach an ideology of hate, they equally used the idea that some humans are more evolved than others.

I recently found this website that greatly disturbed me. It's a hate filled site full of white supremacist propaganda. The scariest thing is that it is very persuasive.

http://www.americancivilrightsreview.com/african101facts1.html

Here are a couple of videos of Christopher Hitchens interviewing a white separatist. Another example of how survival of the fittest is used for division. Fortunately, Hitchens handles it beautifully.

My only conclusion is that with the continual and rapid growth of Atheism around the world, we need to be ever mindful of the potential for those that would twist it for division. The remarkable story of our lowly origin and progressive evolution should serve to unify us all, not tear us apart.

0 members like this

Comment

You need to be a member of Atheist Nexus to add comments!

Join Atheist Nexus

Comment by James Yount on July 3, 2012 at 3:25pm: Thanks for the thoughtful comments Tonya. I think this subject is something that we all think about, but are afraid to talk about.

Comment by James Yount on July 3, 2012 at 3:16pm: Many could say the same about males and females. I'm not discounting the differences, but if we hold all races to the highest of standards then we as a species will evolve together to meet it. Further, as we get past the PC/everybody's equal in every way standard, then we open ourselves up to separatism and race wars again.

Anyway, I think that we all know that there is a difference between peoples on a biological level and that evolution works on that basis. We should, however, be careful to not base our society on nature's example. I think we as a species we have, or at least can, be above it.

Comment by Tonya Wynn on July 3, 2012 at 3:02pm: To SOME degree, in general, I believe that whites or asians are smarter and blacks are stronger/have more endurance. I met a black lawyer who also thought that blacks are stronger...he said that it is a scientific fact that they have a higher percentage (or something liKe it) of muscle. A black preacher ( a real nut job) used the excuse of beating the parishioner's kids by saying that blacks aren't as sensitive to pain. I think it is plausible that because whites, who evolved from blacks, had to both travel a lot and live in harsh environments, so the more stupid ones couldn't survive in such cold, harsh environments. If a white person wasn't smart enough or eager enough to hunt large, dangerous animals, to make warm enough clothing and to find/make shelter, they died. Blacks, in the warm, animal-filled African continent, didn't have to struggle as much, so the less intelligent were safe. I also think that the reason blacks have fewer deformed or mentally ill is because their culture found it taboo and the babies were euthanized at birth, like the Hawaiians did. So those bad genes weren't passed on generation to generation. Whites didn't need to or didn't do this, at least as much, so we have more deformities passed on. This doesn't mean that individual blacks aren't smater than some whites or that there aren't some whimpy, sickly blacks out there. This is a HUGE generalization. We are animals and need to look at our species as objectively as possible, at times.

Comment by Tonya Wynn on July 3, 2012 at 2:48pm: Hopefully no one else has written this; I didn't check..'survival of the fittest' doesn't mean survival of the strongest or meanest/most aggressive always.. it means survival of the species or INDIVIDUALS who most fit the environment. Often, the fittest are born with slight variations, even mistakes/defects, that give them a slight edge over their competitors. I read and LOVED The Pelican's Smile by Stephen Gould, years ago, and he covers this concept in detail. Some times, but not always, the more aggressive/bigger/ meaner ones survive better. It is really a case-by-case issue. And it is the individual of the species who's babies live to breed on, who survives...not necessarily the group. The individual who better fits the environment/situation becomes the group.

Comment by James Yount on June 27, 2012 at 11:23am: Yes Michael, I agree for the most part. Though I have seen my share of people change their ideologies when presented with facts and no basis to interpret them. It's not atheism directly that leads to this survival of the fittest attitude but rather a false ideology that says that we should act as nature. I recently viewed a comment from an atheist on the subject of food stamps. He stated, "why should I care if other people's kids starve. It's survival of the fittest." Not that this mentality is exclusive to evolutionists. How often have you heard the argument from a Christian that homosexuality is wrong on the basis that it's unnatural, that animals don't do it? I guess what I'm trying to say is that as our natural origins become more and more widely accepted, we are quick to combat the urge of the uneducated masses to make nature their new god and new moral guide. Nature is cold, has no regard for the weak, and is a poor basis for ethics.

Comment by Michael R on June 27, 2012 at 2:04am: A system of desires (racial supremacy/war) does not follow from a system of beliefs (atheism). Yes there are race difference e.g. Asians are smarter than Whites who are smarter than Blacks. Yes, ethnocentrism is a biological fact: we prefer the company of our own race.

But you can acknowledge these facts and still go either way in your worldview: you can try to overcome these facts and build a one-world open-borders utopia, or you can go the other way and join your race in striving to dominate other races, or you can take a middle position that tries to acknowledge our biological preferences without pitting us against each other.

My point is: facts don't determine your desires, emotions do. What's in a man's heart determines his pursuits. Not such much his beliefs.

Comment by James Yount on June 26, 2012 at 11:58pm: Thank you for taking the time to watch them Steph. As long as we keep examining ourselves and speaking out, we shouldn't fall into the same traps. :)

Comment by Steph S. on June 26, 2012 at 11:44pm: Thank you James I enjoyed learning about how survivor of the fittest can be used the wrong way. I learned some new things - thanks for the videos.