Difference between revisions of "Social Darwinism"

From Conservapedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 1: Line 1:
−
Beginning in 1887, social scientists were using the term "social Darwinism" to apply the survival-of-the-fittest theory to social situations.  Under this theory, the wealthiest or most powerful in society must be biologically superior, and less "fit" persons should die, i.e. "Survival of the Fattest".
+
Beginning in 1887, social scientists were using the term "social Darwinism" to apply the survival-of-the-fittest theory to social situations.  Under this theory, the wealthiest or most powerful in society must be biologically superior, and less "fit" persons should die, i.e. "Survival of the Fattest". However, this is normally limited to the animal kingdom and has no place in human society anymore. This is linked to evolution and is regarded by mostly everyone to be true, except narrow minded God-botherers.  
−
 
 
−
Soon many began to view racial struggles, and war itself, as a perfectly natural example of survival-of-the-fittest in the human race. The horrific wars of the 20th century, employing shockingly brutal tactics, were encouraged by a belief in survival-of-the-fittest among humans.  While social Darwinism itself was applied to social and economic situations rather than military ones, it is easy how extreme versions of social Darwinism could justify physical struggles among races.
 
−
 
 
 
[[Category:Sociology]]
 
[[Category:Sociology]]

Revision as of 12:00, March 20, 2007

Beginning in 1887, social scientists were using the term "social Darwinism" to apply the survival-of-the-fittest theory to social situations. Under this theory, the wealthiest or most powerful in society must be biologically superior, and less "fit" persons should die, i.e. "Survival of the Fattest". However, this is normally limited to the animal kingdom and has no place in human society anymore. This is linked to evolution and is regarded by mostly everyone to be true, except narrow minded God-botherers.