History, Evolution, and The Darwin Debate

Darwiniana header image 2

Darwin, Marx, Freud

December 21st, 2006 · No Comments

Reference: UD.
The problem here is that Darwin didn’t show anything of the kind. And such is the botched science education now dominant that even writers of textbooks are confused and incapable of seeing the howlers in their pronouncements.

Actually, Marx’s theories are not so well founded, but one thing he did do was to expose the game of ideology behind theories, Darwinism being a prime case (as Marx originally pointed out, a fact suppressed by the current left). As to Freud: his thinking on the unconscious is a degenerate version of Schopenhauer (via Nietzsche?). Schopenhauer clearly put materialistic/spiritual dualities in a better perspective than metaphysical theologians.

As Douglas Futuyma wrote in one edition of his textbook promoting Darwinism:

Darwin showed that material causes are a sufficient explanation not only for physical phenomena, as Descartes and Newton had shown, but also for biological phenomena with all their seeming evidence of design and purpose. By coupling undirected, purposeless variation to the blind, uncaring process of natural selection, Darwin made theological or spiritual explanations of the life processes superfluous. Together with Marx’s materialistic theory of history and society and Freud’s attribution of human behavior to influences over which we have little control, Darwin’s theory of evolution was a crucial plank in the platform of mechanism and materialism… (3rd edition, 1998, p. 5)

Tags: Evolution · Philosophy

0 responses so far ↓

  • There are no comments yet...Kick things off by filling out the form below.

Leave a Comment