Ruling by deception is still Darwinism - How big is your gilded cage? (Dec/03/2007 )
The theory of Darwinism is getting something needed based on being better or cleverer than someone else. What do you consider to be a deceptive practice in your country that profits someone and harms you?
dave2
Group: Active Member
Posts: 98
Joined: 3-August 07
Member No.: 25798
Warn: (0%)
Who in your life cracks the whip? Your slave-driving bossman who your helping get that promotion before he calmly fires you. Or perhaps your over achieving spouse who want 4 kids, 4 cars and 4 houses on your back before your 30. And these are the known people in your life who you barter with and lose to everyday. What about the ones you don't really know who are riding on your back like tenacious little monkeys. Every democratic society has them. Thoughtout the centuries every free society has given rise to dictatorships, some obvious and most camouflaged to assist infuential families in gaining control over the good thing in your country available to you by implementing legal restrictions and increasing costs. These indiscernible monarckies control the flow of commerce by controling your needs and disires without you realizing it.
\
So how are they squeezing your back up against those bars? What are the bare necessities that you need to survive everyday? Are gas and food prices too high for you to buy medications? Is your mortgage rate set by your government so high that your a few paychecks away from living out on the street? Police tickets are now $75 for doing 6 miles over the speed limit. Are you looking forward to buying yourself that Christmas present subconsciously thinking that it will take your mind off your troubles?
TELL ME WHAT'S IN YOUR COUNTRY THAT REALLY TICS YOU OFF!!!!
swanny
Group: Active Member
Posts: 631
Joined: 8-March 06
From: Great Southern Land, Home of the Ashes...and the cricket World Cup's semi-permanent home, Home of the Mandela Cup, the Gregan-Larkham trophy (and the Rugby World Cup, pehaps???)...
Member No.: 13991
Yeah, dave. Take a chill pill.
--------------------
All care, a bit of (hopefully educated) guesswork, no responsibility.
beccaf22
Really? You complained to bioforum because you didn't like her response? I thought she was addressing exactly the things you mentioned, just responding that she doesnt have issues with those things and why... ummm it sorta suprises me that you are worried about dictatorship and yet you are upset with free speech... hmmmm
BTW, I actually disagree with her, just think you should be willing to accept peoples answers even if you disagree, especially if you dislike dictatorships...
I personally dislike alot of stuff, I think gas prices are ridiculous and it REALLY pisses me off that the gas companies are making record profits in the US while people struggle to pay the 3.00 a gallon they are jacking the prices up to, this is why I am a democrat, someone, preferably our government, needs to tell the oil companies that they don't get to roll in profits by breaking the backs of working americans, and I think it speaks to your hypothesis that the media doesn't really cover that story at all when I think there should be outrage. An author was on Colbert Report last night talking about the 10 steps all dictatorships go through, she only listed the first 5 but the similarities with the Bush agenda are terrifying!!!
Anyway, my 2 cents, a little scared that I am suddenly expressing my opinions on things like politics and religion, usually shy away because people tend to judge others harshly on these subjects, just remember you can still trust my answers to technical questions even if we strongly disagree about these chit chat things!
--------------------
It has been said that the primary function of schools is to impart enough facts to make children stop asking questions. Some, with whom the schools do not succeed, become scientists. - Knut Schmidt-Nielson
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Albert Einstein
dave2
View Member Profile
Add as Friend
Send Message
Find Member's Topics
Find Member's Posts Nov 30 2007, 10:26 AM Post #6
Enthusiast
Group: Active Member
Posts: 98
Joined: 3-August 07
Member No.: 25798
Warn: (0%)
Thank you Mr. CAFFEINE. Just kidding. I agree completely with you except for the first paragraph because I am right to dislike those that provide free lip service to the fat cats in Washington that are screwing us behind our back. That's right, behind our backs. And this guy, or girl, with a 12th grade education in economics is trying to tell us that our government agencies are calling the shots without big industry lobbyists (big oil lobbyists) paying off the Bushs who appoint and influence directors and chairmen and others who set gas prices along with interest rates food prices and everything else that they can make a dollar controlling.
These are just the things that you and I can see, but they control so much more that people don't see. I need to take a break.
Full Edit
Quick Edit
dave2
View Member Profile
Add as Friend
Send Message
Find Member's Topics
Find Member's Posts Dec 1 2007, 07:30 AM Post #7
Enthusiast
Group: Active Member
Posts: 98
Joined: 3-August 07
Member No.: 25798
Warn: (0%)
Again my many thanks to you Beccaf22 for your input, and I hope you will come back and join me again in this discussion about tyranny being alive and will in the 21st century. Do people ever change? The anser is no, and history will always repeat itself.
Some of the Bush family's treasonous acts against Americans.
1. They have artificially increased the wholesale price of gas to triple the inflationary price of gas and other commodities which increases industrial profits. They want to take away your freedom to go where you want to, your freedom to come and go as you please in your cars.
2. The Bushs knew about the 911 planes before 09-11-01 so that he could invade the middle east for oil profit kickbacks.
3. Bush Sr. gave authorization to spread weaponized Mycoplasma to troups and then bring them back into the general population to cantaminate everyone.
4. Jeb Bush used state health laboratory equipment for growth and testing of weaponized pathogens.
All I know is what's bad about America, so that's all I can talk about. But what about you and the tyrants in your country who've been socking it to you for years? It must be eating away at you , so why don't you tell us all about it.
casandra
View Member Profile
Add as Friend
Send Message
Find Member's Topics
Find Member's Posts Yesterday, 07:09 PM Post #9
Enthusiast
Group: Active Member
Posts: 89
Joined: 2-May 06
From: Canada
Member No.: 15148
QUOTE(dave2 @ Nov 29 2007, 09:33 AM)
Who in your life cracks the whip? Your slave-driving bossman who your helping get that promotion before he calmly fires you. Or perhaps your over achieving spouse who want 4 kids, 4 cars and 4 houses on your back before your 30. And these are the known people in your life who you barter with and lose to everyday. What about the ones you don't really know who are riding on your back like tenacious little monkeys. Every democratic society has them. Thoughtout the centuries every free society has given rise to dictatorships, some obvious and most camouflaged to assist infuential families in gaining control over the good thing in your country available to you by implementing legal restrictions and increasing costs. These indiscernible monarckies control the flow of commerce by controling your needs and disires without you realizing it.
\
So how are they squeezing your back up against those bars? What are the bare necessities that you need to survive everyday? Are gas and food prices too high for you to buy medications? Is your mortgage rate set by your government so high that your a few paychecks away from living out on the street? Police tickets are now $75 for doing 6 miles over the speed limit. Are you looking forward to buying yourself that Christmas present subconsciously thinking that it will take your mind off your troubles?
TELL ME WHAT'S IN YOUR COUNTRY THAT REALLY TICS YOU OFF!!!!
Up to your old tricks again eh dave? How can you complain to Bioforum about Vetticus, surely to be fair you should’ve reported me first since I instigated the hijack (together with my feuding partner hobglobin) you snitch!! If you tone down your paranoia (or is it persecution complex?) and histrionics (you’d eclipse me as the drama queen) you may be on to something here…modern day enslavement, high-level corruption and greed, excessive consumerism and moral bankruptcy, S &M and bestiality (whips and what’s that monkey doing on your back?) …what more can John Le Carre ask for? Besides we’re probably not the best target audience for this kind of rhetoric since most of us are not yet in that stage of having a series of cars, mortgages and spouses.
Flippancy aside, you’re one to talk about tyrannies but isn’t the US (with its henchmen the CIA) the master puppeteer …think Pinochet, Noriega, Papa Doc, Suharto, Marcos, Shah of Iran, Sadam etc. And for which purpose…to spread your own brand of democracy or is it for the power balance, the endless supply of cheap resources and labor, opening up potential markets, arms trade iow for protecting and maintaining its economic and military/security interests...so pls don’t tell me that the average working American did/does not benefit from all this.
You wanna talk oil prices? We pay more than a dollar (loonie is in parity with the greenback now) for a liter and in some places even more than a dollar fifty esp at summer time and I think that the Europeans pay about the same thing or even more. How much higher do you Americans pay? And taxes? We sorta celebrate here the 1st of July for it is the day that we start earning and saving for ourselves bec all that we’ve worked for during the first half of the year just goes to taxes (properties, goods and services, provincial and federal) and social benefits premium. Is there anything other than polemics here or with all your wisdom and your desire to educate us, will you propose something to help break ourselves out of this cage, gilded yes but nevertheless still a prison? Or did Noam Chomsky hit the bullseye when he said “All over the place, from the popular culture to the propaganda system, there is constant pressure to make people feel that they are helpless, that the only role they can have is to ratify decisions and to consume."
Should we care about how the government is spending our hard-earned money and screwing us behind our backs? Of course we should but personally I am more outraged if I see homeless people in the downtown metro shivering in their tattered coats when temperatures drop below zero outside or read about hungry and neglected children going to schools or the endless wait in the emergency rooms or for a CT-scan. I suggest you chill and I propose that you also give me a nickname..'coz I'm feeling so left out .
with 18+ years of inexperience,
casandra
--------------------
"Devoid of all sarcasm and with my sincerest compliments, I hereby declare that casandra's posts are among the most imaginative, funny, and interesting ones."
- hobglobin (signature)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"But that's the drawback of a low-evolved male human: Always directly writing what is coming up in his mind."
- hobglobin (Woman: The most evolved species)
« Next Oldest · Chit Chat · Next Newest »
The topic has nothing to do with evolution.
You have redefined Darwinism. Please dont demonize this term in a suggestive way to associate it to anything evil.
It is Darwinism! Survival of the fittest - - strongest mentally or physically. This topic also relates to evolution. Besides nothing under this heading is exactly evolution or Darwinism. This one is about as close as it gets.
You have redefined Darwinism. Please dont demonize this term in a suggestive way to associate it to anything evil.
you did not do well in your high school biology class.
Mr. Genehunter, you must have gone to school a long time ago. 
In the 19th century context in which Darwin's Origin of Species was first received, "Darwinism" came to stand for an entire range of evolutionary (and often revolutionary) philosophies about both biology and society. One of the more prominent approaches was that summed in the phrase "survival of the fittest" by the philosopher Herbert Spencer, which was later taken to be emblematic of Darwinism even though Spencer's own understanding of evolution was more Lamarckian than Darwinian, and predated the publication of Darwin's theory. What we now call "Social Darwinism" was, in its day, synonymous with "Darwinism" — the application of Darwinian principles of "struggle" to society, usually in support of anti-philanthropic political agendas. Another interpretation, one notably favored by Darwin's half-cousin Francis Galton, was that Darwinism implied that because natural selection was apparently no longer working on "civilized" people it was possible for "inferior" strains of people (who would normally be filtered out of the gene pool) to overwhelm the "superior" strains, and corrective measures would have to be undertaken — the foundation of eugenics.
In Darwin's day there was no rigid definition of the term "Darwinism", and it was used by opponents and proponents of Darwin's biological theory alike to mean whatever they wanted it to in a larger context.
Are corrective measures being undertaken today???????? THIS IS DARWINISM.
let me help you finish the job. 
Darwinism as selectionism
To distinguish themselves from the very loose meaning of "Darwinism" prevalent in the 19th century, those who advocated evolution by natural selection after the death of Darwin became known as neo-Darwinists. August Weismann was the most prominent member of this school, and further articulated that neo-Darwinism referred to evolution specifically by forms of "selection" (natural selection, including sexual selection), and that it was articulated around the idea that the hereditary material of an organism was not modified by the further development of the organism. Neo-Darwinism poised itself against neo-Lamarckism, also popular at the end of the 19th century and beginning of the 20th century, which argued that bodily modifications acquired during the lifetime of the organism could be hereditarily passed on to the next generation. Weismann's neo-Darwinism, on the other hand, argued that all of an organism's hereditary material was kept in its germ plasm, which existed separately from the rest of the organism's development.
Neo-Darwinism was not terribly popular in the scientific community, as most biologists felt that the complete segregation of development and heredity actions seems unlikely or unwarranted. After the development of the modern evolutionary synthesis in the 1930s, however, the selection theory became increasingly popular amongst biologists, and codified the more modern definition of Darwinism which we have today.
Darwinian processes
In a modern definition of the term, a Darwinian process requires the following schema:
1. Self-replication/Inheritance: Some number of entities must be capable of producing copies of themselves, and those copies must also be capable of reproduction. The new copies must inherit the traits of old ones. Sometimes the different variations are recombined in sexual reproduction.
2. Variation: There must be a range of different traits in the population of entities, and there must be a mechanism for introducing new variations into the population.
3. Selection: Inherited traits must somehow affect the ability of the entities to reproduce themselves, either by survival (natural selection), or by ability to produce offspring by finding partners (sexual selection).
If the entity or organism survives to reproduce, the process restarts. Sometimes, in stricter formulations, it is required that variation and selection act on different entities, variation on the replicator (genotype) and selection on the interactor (phenotype).
Darwinism asserts that any system given these conditions, by whatever means, evolution is likely to occur. That is, over time, the entities will accumulate complex traits that favor their reproduction. This is called Universal Darwinism, a term coined by Richard Dawkins in his 1976 book The Selfish Gene[citation needed] .
Most obviously, this can refer to biological evolution. However, it has other potential spheres, the best known of which is the meme, a concept of inheritance and modification of ideas introduced by Richard Dawkins in The Selfish Gene and further refined by researchers such as Richard Brodie and Susan Blackmore. It has been disputed if this was a Darwinian process, since it is unproven that memes undergo random mutations. However, it is noted many times in discussions of Universal Darwinism that the variation within a population need not be random. In fact Richard Dawkins states that the fact that Darwinian evoulution can occur "even if" the mutation/variation is random or directed to a degree away from the direction of the selection pressure.
Perhaps surprisingly Darwinian theories have been proposed as explanations of the origin of the universe we live in. Lee Smolin's theory Cosmological natural selection explains the selection of a universe with the correct fundamental physical parameters to support complex matter such as stars and ourselves. Wojciech Zurek's theory of Quantum darwinism explains the selection of the our classical macroscopic world from underlying quantum processes.
Another example to illustrate are computer systems (PCs). Taking the software as the replicator and the whole system as the interactor, it could be seen as a Darwinian system, however, the code does not change randomly, but is directionally changed or rewritten from scratch; also systems do not reproduce.
Daniel Dennett (1995) in Darwin's Dangerous Idea argues for Universal Darwinism.
Other Usages of the Term
The term Darwinism is often used by promotors of creationism to describe evolution, notably by leading members of the intelligent design movement.[2] In this usage, the term has connotations of atheism. For example, in Charles Hodge's book What Is Darwinism?, Hodge answers the question posed in the book's title by concluding: "It is Atheism."[3][4][5] Creationists use the term Darwinism, often pejoratively, to imply that the theory has been held as true only by Darwin and a core group of his followers, whom they cast as dogmatic and inflexible in their belief.[6] Casting evolution as a doctrine or belief bolsters religiously motivated political arguments to mandate equal time for the teaching of creationism in public schools.
However, Darwinism is also used neutrally within the scientific community to distinguish modern evolutionary theories from those first proposed by Darwin, as well as by historians to differentiate it from other evolutionary theories from around the same period. For example, Darwinism may be used to refer to Darwin's proposed mechanism of natural selection, in comparison to more recent theories such as genetic drift and gene flow. It may also refer specifically to the role of Charles Darwin as opposed to others in the history of evolutionary thought — particularly contrasting Darwin's results with those of earlier theories such as Lamarckism or later ones such as the modern synthesis. A notable example of a scientist who uses the term in a positive sense is Richard Dawkins[citation needed].
References
1. ^ Evolution and Wonder - Understanding Charles Darwin - Speaking of Faith® from American Public Media. Retrieved on 2007-07-27.
2. ^ Johnson, Phillip E.. What is Darwinism?. Retrieved on 2007-01-04.
3. ^ Matthew, Ropp. Charles Hodge and His Objection to Darwinism. Retrieved on 2007-01-04.
4. ^ Hodge, Charles. What is Darwinism?. Retrieved on 2007-01-04.
5. ^ Hodge, Charles (1874). What is Darwinism?. Scribner, Armstrong, and Company. OCLC 11489956.
6. ^ From the Beagle to the School Board: God Goes Back to School, Morris Sullivan, Impact Press, Spring 2005.
We too know how to use wikipedia... geez get a better source, try merriam webster, or oxford english dictionaries, at least they aren't editable by anyone who wants.
This is not Darwinism, it is "social Darwinism" a semi-application of some of the principles of evolutionary theory to political agendas etc, note that the definitions have changed since the 1800's, words evolve too:
From Merriam-Webster dictionary online December 2007 Merriam-Webster
Main Entry:
social Darwinism
Function:
noun
Date:
1887
: an extension of Darwinism to social phenomena; specifically : a sociological theory that sociocultural advance is the product of intergroup conflict and competition and the socially elite classes (as those possessing wealth and power) possess biological superiority in the struggle for existence
I however note that it doesn't actually work, it is usually post ipso facto that the idea is applied. Politics is all about balancing the effects of policies etc to gain what you want the most, but on a large scale it must also be about the good of the majority of the people otherwise you get revolution/dissident/insurgency whatever you like to call it, after all you can't satisfy everyone all of the time. Power to the People!
bob
All right!!!! Then I'm writing about Social Darwinism. 
Social Darwinism is the idea that Charles Darwin's theory can be extended and applied to the social realm, i.e. that just as competition between individual organisms drives biological evolutionary change (speciation) through "survival of the fittest" (not a scientific term itself), competition between individuals, groups, nations or ideas drives social evolution in human societies.
Let's just continue with the subject please. 
No please go to a sociology forum!!!!