Now, Failures, that's a very logical argument! But all it proves is that Hitler's logic was clearly flawed. I think we all agree on that.
Yes, his logic was flawed, and it has nothing to do with natural selection.
And while I agree that he replaced 'fittest' with 'select', it does not disprove my last point. In Hitler's mind - that's the key part, it was in his mind, not anyone on this forum's mind - his actions were justified by natural selection.
Selection, not natural selection. This cannot be understated. If his philosophy had been based on natural selection, there would have been no need for him to take action against the Jews, Roma, Social Democrats, etc etc etc.
There's no logical corollary for what you propose. How can evolution be blamed for the application of a philosophy which doesn't follow the proper analogy?
We can most likely all agree that Hitler was not particularly rational. The point I am making is that in HIS mind, his actions were merely reinforcing nature, he was helping nature out. He considered Jews an inferior race, but that does not mean they are.
If we agree that Hitler wasn't rational and came to this conclusion, then you've provided the fault in your own argument.
You said that the belief in evolution is what lead to Hitler's genocidal philosophy, but if this philosophy only comes from an irrational person, it can hardly be considered as intuitive as you claim.
None of this provides reasonable support that people who believe in evolution face any sort of dilemma. Rational people do not come to the philosophical conclusion that you insist they must.
As I stated before, I believe your conclusion is flawed due to a misunderstanding of what evolution actually is. Given statements you've made in this thread, I think that the first step in understanding the mechanisms involved in evolution is to know the proper definition of "fitness." Beyond that, you need to confine your criticisms of evolution to the scope in which evolutionary theory is contained: Bio-diversity.
Again, it is fact that Hitler considered his actions justified by natural selection, whether this is logical and rational, or neither, I am no longer debating.
He didn't. Totalitarians aren't concerned with justifying their actions. They are only concerned with the end product. Presenting Hitler as someone who was deeply invested in evolutionary theory is medley of false assumptions.
It is simple FACT that Hitler believed his actions were justified. It is also a simple FACT that others are now proposing that rape and other forms of murder are also justified by natural selection.
These are not facts. You're applying a narrative that is not supported. In the instance of rape, studying rape in a species is not the same as justifying it.
Again, I KNOW this is not a rational way of thinking, so let's not try to start a debate on the rationality of the beliefs they hold, but can we agree that through a certain philosophy - fatally flawed or otherwise - there have been and are people who are advocating rape, infanticide, and genocide as natural and perhaps even beneficial to humanity?
No. We do not agree.