civilisations don't fail because of 'natural selection', dilbert. you completely misunderstand darwin's thought.
not surprising as for you the whole interest isn't one of biology, but rather all the victorian-vintage ideology that stemmed from early misreadings and polemics surrounding the new darwinism: eugenics, unscientific race science, malthusianism, etc.
you cannot make any scientifically verifiable claims about 'the darwinian process of civilisation'. political unions don't come into and cease being because of 'natural selection', dilbert. joining and leaving the EU, or the act of union of 1707 between the kingdoms of the UK, aren't 'determined' or 'selected for' by essentially blind, selection-optimization processes of adaptation. they're acts of human will and agency. there is zero will or agency in darwinism – not unless you introduce spurious metaphysics or religion by the back door about 'vital life forces' or 'intelligent design' or somesuch (ironic for such a cantankerous atheist).
read a history book.
related, but here is an excellent précis by the director of the max planck institute for the history of science - just about one of the most prestigious chairs anywhere in the world on this very intersection between science and history - of the ongoing misunderstandings and misapplications of mendelianism, with an emphasis on race science and genetic determinism.
https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v46/n21 … inklednessmaybe take your own advice and, i dunno, read something once in a while instead of just your usual angsty teenage attitudinising about 'the end of western civilisation'.
Last edited by uziq (2024-12-23 05:51:21)
