Also, to add to that illustration: Social Darwinism is not advocated by biologists. You know, the ones who actually study things like Natural Selection? The biggest proponents of it are generally the more ignorant of the upper class. You know, the ones who own more of the shit, but contribute to less of the shit the world needs. These people aren't actually better, they just think they are.aegix drakan said:Just felt like extending the scenario a bit. Was too tempting not to.Atmos Duality said:Social Darwinism is an oxymoron.
"Asshole: I abused the shit out of him/her and then killed them because I felt s/he was inferior."
"Society: Oh, OK! Carry on. Thank you for ridding us of an inferior person."
Dead guy's brother: My name is Inigo montoya, you killed my brother. prepare to die.
Asshole: *freak out mode* DONT TASE ME BRO! I'M SOR-
dead guy's bro: *bang*
Society: Oh you killed him! You're a bad person!
bro: ...He shouldn't have been so inferior so as to need to abuse and kill people to feel good. also, he should have adapted to have a gun and be faster on the draw than me.
Society: UMMMM...........*confused*
Also, on that topic, to me it feels like a lot of Social Darwinists don't really see themselves ever being in the position of the one being "darwin'd out". If suddenly, everyone but them got superpowers and they became irrelevant with no way to compete, I bet you most of them would cry foul.
I really think that social darwinism is dumb. I mean...People deserve to get weeded out since they don't have social skills or have emotional issues? When half the time these things are CAUSED by the bullying? Not cool bro. We're not a society of barely surviving cavemen anymore. We shouldn't act like we still are.
You see, these idiots who believe this stuff are coming close to the gross misunderstanding of genetics that existed in the Soviet Union: Inherited charecteristics can be passed on. Learnt ones CANNOT. If you learn social skills, you don't make the next generation better for doing so, because your learning does not get encoded in your DNA for your children. We're a net of our experiences and inherited traits. Social skills are primarily things that are learnt: Look at how etiquette and culture have changed over time-to have "good" social skills, you need to understand those rules. It's not simply about being born with the "+3 to all social interactions".
And, on a related note: If you think bullying is a good teacher of social skills, then I suggest that getting stabbed is a good teacher of emergency first aid skills. Oh, what's that? You can't do much learning when you're trying not to bleed out? Kind of similar to how kids can't learn to socialise when they're being ostracised, hey? It's the old Catch-22: For you to be able to learn social skills, you have to interact with others. If you don't have them, you're more likely to be bullied. But if you're bullied, it's harder to interact with others, and thus, you're more likely to have poor social skills and be bullied.
More importantly, go to your schools. Who get bullied more often? The studious ones? The ones who put effort into their work? Oh, yeah, the future engineers and scientists. So, the idea of social darwinism, RE Bullying, is that a bunch of people are unworthy of survival due to the respecting of the right of some to mistreat others, even when some of those who are deemed less useful by that stupid definition are more useful.
I'll just put it out there: I'm worth 50 of any of my tormentors. Easily. If you really think that's what survival of the fittest means, I suggest you go back to your school, stop beating on the littler guys, and pay attention in your Biology class. And watch Idiocracy, because really, if you want a bunch of ignorant boors everywhere, you're going the right way.