Latest Challenges to the Teaching of Evolution

Come on boys. Deal with the Veblen or else creep away silently like effemm has done. It's directly on topic and on the thread.

There's nowhere to hide.

From American Philosophy's site:

Thorstein Veblen (1857-1929)

Thorstein Bunde Veblen (picture) was born in Valders, Wisconsin on July 30, 1857. He is best known for his book The Theory of The Leisure Class (1899), a classic of social theory that introduced the concept of "conspicuous consumption." Veblen received a Ph.D. from Yale in 1884 and taught at the University of Chicago, Stanford University, the University of Wisconsin, and the New School for Social Research. Before Veblen turned to the study of social and economic facts and theories, he had concentrated upon philosophy, especially the works of Kant, Comte and Spencer, and, in his later years, the problems of economics remained closely connected in Veblen's mind with fundamental problems of life, civilization and the general theory of science.

Intending to integrate political economy into the general movement of science, Veblen discussed the evolution of the scientific point of view, the place of science within the framework of civilization, and the function of evolution within political economy. Although Veblen was strongly impressed by the doctrine of evolution, he was opposed to the simple application of the evolutionary principles to the study of social phenomena. He was also strongly opposed to positivism, and relied more upon German idealism and romanticism. He sometimes flirted with theorists of racialism like Gobineau and H.S. Chamberlin, and, if not influenced by Georges Sorel, he came in his own way very close to the latter's standpoint. Both Sorel and Veblen were inspired by Marx and criticised him by similar arguments. Both were enthusiasts of the idea of promoting industrial production by social political changes. Also, both considered the capitalist unfit to achieve technical progress and they advocated recruitment of industrial leaders from the classes of salaried technicians and workers.

Veblen argued that a fundamental conflict exists between the making of goods and the making of money. In The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904), he argued that the entrepreneur is a reactionary predator whose perspective is diametrically opposed to that of the engineer or industrialist. Veblen's businessperson makes profits not by providing an outlet for the forces of industrialization and social evolution but by distorting them: by engaging in monetary manipulations, by restricting output to keep prices artificially high, and by interfering with the engineers who actually produce goods and services. The founder of the so-called institutionalist school, Veblen believed that economics must not be studied as a closed system but rather as an aspect of a culture whose customs and habits constitute institutions that are rapidly changing.

Veblen's violent attacks on the business class and its ideology have caused violent controversies in America. In Europe Veblen remained nearly unknown. Brought up in a clannish community of immigrants from Norway, Veblen never became completely at ease with the American way of living. He had no talent for teaching, and his academic career was hampered by the troubles of his private life. But his writing, especially his first and principal book Theory of the Leisure Class, had a fermenting effect on economic and social thinking in America. Thorstein Veblen died on August 3, 1929.

Unquote

Hardly a viewpoint of the conservative movement, neo or otherwise in America or anywhere else. His theories do not debunk biological evolution or really have anything to do with it -- it's plainly an off-topic ploy to turn the discussion into a socio-political controversy, not whether Creationism or ID should be taught alongside scientific evolution in public schools. The work of a troll.

That is incorrect. You are using the word "conservative" just the way you want to. Veblen was a fundamental conservative rooted in the land and in humanity as a whole and not the late American invention of business enterprise now running riot.

There's nobody on this thread suggesting that ID or Creationism be taught in schools. If you can't understand the point that the short quote made what am I supposed to do about it? Calling me a troll for the umpteenth time only makes you look stupid.

The point is that there are other important standpoints besides the scientific and industrial, and which Veblen listed, from which to consider the exclusive teaching of evolution. And it has to be exclusive for the reasons I dwelt on at length long before Johnnie-come-lately trolls arrived on the scene blurting their juvenile inanities as if the thread only started on the day they arrived.

You really are a troll which is why you project it on to me. And you're boring. And you're a hypocrite. And you're no evolutionist. You're just against Christianity for personal reasons to do with throwing off disciplines inhibiting your unrestrained ego.

I can attack Christianity miles better than you could even dream of.

Quote- I can attack Christianity miles better than you could even dream of. Unquote.
Never a truer word spoken, you have done more than anyone that I know of to give others ammunition to shoot down the hot air balloons full of myth and faith and belief, keep up the good work I'm proud of you.

This lot of Christian anti-IDers couldn't shoot down a kid's balloon at 2 paces.

You haven't a clue what I meant tf and your sarcasm is on the schoolyard plane.

This has NOTHING to do with evolution.
K
O

And that has nothing to do with challenges to the teaching of evolution theory. Have you nothing to say about Veblen's challenge to anti-IDers? He said, if I may remind you, that there is a "very high utility" in the concept of an intelligent designer in relation to comfort in perplexity and from the aesthetic, spiritual, moral, political, military and social points of views and he even allowed that the utility involved an economic (scientific) value of great complexity.

Perhaps you will comment on that TK instead of trolling the thread as is your wont.

And the emphasis on "nothing" is insulting. I know what nothing means. If your usual contacts need a word like that to be emphasised it is not evidence that I do.

That's the only part I agree with.

From the point of view of sociological stability (thought laziness), ID is a very powerful concept.

Law and order is necessary cause it allows big profits, but to do so they need to "level" the average crowd's minds.

ID is a very powerful tool to do so..

A naturally evolved life versus one that is designed as a matter of history is what is at debate. The applications of design on human institutions is irrelevant. Evolution being used outside of the realm of biology has no place here. Evolution is not a theory of economics, not a theory of politics or morals. It is a theory about how divers life came to be. Trying to show how evolution doesn't work in some social aspect only demonstrates your ignorance on this matter.

There is absolutely nothing about ID of value. It cannot be used to do anything.

T
K
O

I suppose Francois that you are there involved in distancing yourself from the average crowd. What you might have against "big profits" I cannot imagine. What use would scientific knowledge be in the absence of the Protestant work ethic being conditioned into the average crowd? Unless you have recourse to whips and general terror-based repression.

Your presence on the ethereal plane of refined exellence is not a privilege granted to the large majority of us and if it was you yourself would then be average.

It is not. The debate is about whether to teach the ramifications of a naturally evolved life to what Francis snootily refers to as the "average crowd". But it is significant that you speak of the naturally evolved life without bothering about the ramifications of doing so as if nothing significant will result from doing so.



Those applications are not only not irrelevant but are the only things of any consequence. Without a consideration of consequences the debate is futile as I have often pointed out.

Evolution processes are entirely economic.

Your post is fatuous TK.

You are so boring spendi. I keep hoping you'll offer something new and exciting.

There are no ramifications to teaching the truth. If there were ramifications, it wouldn't be for teaching the truth, but for hiding the truth or misinforming people in the first place.

You employ the idiocy of holding yourself hostage.

Teaching evolution has ramifications only because you're willing to contrive all sorts of way to threaten that' you'll jump off the building. The ramifications aren't with teaching evolution, it's with rejecting it.

T
K
O

ID may have had some attraction when we didn't have all the science of today, but to continue believing in a creator in this day and age is beyond common sense and logic.

Believers continue to repeat "loving god," but how can anyone come to this conclusion? How does christians continue to advocate for the fetus while over one billion humans on this planet starve? Will more children save their souls? Have they helped those starving people as they demand that a fetus be allowed to have a life on this planet? Have they ever helped any single mother or a young girl raped and got pregnant? How about a poor family with more children than they can support with food and shelter?

Where does "their" love come from?

It comes from their pocketbook and that's about it. It's called "tithing," and is a safe substitution for actually putting any hours of work into direct love.

IDing everyone else on this thread as troll is the tactic of a troll -- one that would have us believe he is a pariah on the level of Ghandi. He's really just another town drunk.

We know that "tithing" has paid millions for law suits from priests raping and molesting children. Good start.

That's not to state that the Catholic church has done nothing monetarily to aid the poor and sick, but the hypocrisy of the church was well portrayed by Fellini in "Roma" with the hysterical fashion show.

I was doing nothing of the sort, Spendi.

Acknowledging my own limitations and shortcomings, being a mere mortal in this vale of tears.



The only thing I have against them is that they are not big enough coming my way. And if they are, a direct debit by some obscure financial authority will reduce them greatly, in order to offer less privileged folks undeserved solace.



My presence in such plane doesn't prevent me from belonging to the average crowd..

"Your presence on the ethereal plane of refined exellence is not a privilege granted to the large majority of us and if it was you yourself would then be average."

A real mouthful -- of gagging vomit.

Another version of the adolescent moronic method of arguing which would be highly dangerous in the educational field and particularly so in science classes.

It's a wonder you are not President Wiz. For life.

'Hysterical" is right! It's laugh a minute - for ten minutes.