Hasn't Darwinism created much of the distress in the world?

Question

I am not talking about the wars or racism. I am talking about people's mindset like 'individual's struggle for survival', (economic/social) class's struggle for survival.
All these things have resulted in decrease in love in the false impression of struggle of life (individualism?).

@alladin : This is what I say Darwin created this mindset. It did not exist as a truth. It is created. Now people act believing it is true. Hence it seems it is true.
Instead if we believe love is the truth and not the struggle, it will be true similarly but beneficially.

Answer 1

The fact that you can personally view a "decrease in love" during your own lifetime (or even century) proves that the gradual forces expressed by Darwin ARE NOT the cause. A condition catastrophic enough to happen in a few lifetimes is not Darwinian. The same elemental human conditions existed centuries ago, yet you only see the "distress from . . . individualism" lately. If this unique distress truly exists, it's root is not in evolution, social or otherwise.

Evolution is a primary force in all things human, good and bad. But blaming "Darwinism" for humanity's short-term foibles is like blaming your Mom's childrearing practices for why you were late to work last week. Darwinism is a powerul "macro" force, influencing life on an epoch scale. However, it's pretty ineffectual on the "micro" level, easily overcome by intelligence, individual circumstance, or morals.

Answer 2

Claiming that Darwinism is responsible for much of the distress in the world, and that before it, all was peachy, is ludicrous. Striving for economic & social survival & success was around long before Darwin, and would still be even if Darwin had never been. The fact that someone put the name of Darwinism to it is merely labeling the process, not creating it.

Claiming that this process is the cause of much of the distress in the world, however, is not so far-fetched. Most conflicts arise because someone thinks that their success and survival is more important than someone else's; or that individual feels that his success and survival is being threatened. Escalate the scope of that individual (i.e.: a corporation, social group, political group, or nation) and you escalate the amount of distress when either of those conditions arise.

Answer 3

Two great moral implications can be drawn from Darwinism. The first, wrongly drawn, is that as the strongest survive then only the strongest should survive. This dangerous doctrine is wrong on several counts. First, it is wrong to argue ought from is — that something is good because it is natural — the so-called naturalistic fallacy. You could, after all, argue that murder and rape are "natural", but it does not follow that these actions are morally right. Secondly, it is wrong because Darwinism says it is the fittest who survive and not the strongest. Fittest might mean, depending on circumstances, the most gentle and compassionate.

The other great moral implication of Darwinism is that if, as Darwin asserts, there is no fundamental difference between us and the other (higher) animals, then surely we should all be in a similar moral category? If we are similar psychologically and physically then why not morally? Presumably, moral status depends upon psychological or physical qualities. If we share these, to a degree, with other animals, then the morality that flows from this will also be similar.

Answer 4

A misapplication of Darwinism has caused these things. He never intended the theory of Evolution to justify the kind of social Darwinism that your question characterizes. His theory simply wished to show how species physically evolve over long stretches of time to suit their environment.
I hope you are not suggesting that scientific theories ought to be kept down because people misinterpret the implications and suffer distress. If that's the case then the Catholic Church was right to quash Galileo for his ideas about the universe. I'm sure at the time it would have been distressing to people that the earth was not the center of the universe.

And as if science had any monopoly on creating false impressions and leading to distress! At least the scientists for the most part, don't do it on purpose.

Answer 5

The individual pettiness of the human race has nothing to do with Darwinism,it's apples and land mines,totally seperate
to anyone with an IQ.
Prob is that today's society will link anything to anything
else without any real connection. Unless one is alone on
an island,their survival is dependant and intertwined with
all others in their immediate to extended world.
The petty 'struggle to survive' crap of today's media is
just another distraction for the 1st world folk with too
much time on their hands and not enough real probs,and
ZERO common sense.

Answer 6

this has nothing whatever to do with darwinism. what you're describing is known as 'social darwinism', which has no logical or empirical connection to evolutionary theory in any way shape or form. evolutionary theory does not lay any groundwork whatever for social darwinism. moral claims do not follow from biological claims: "ought" cannot be deduced from "is".

I agree with you that the mindset of individuals struggling for survival, of only the strong deserving to survive, of a kind of war of all against all, is a horrible philosophy that has negatively contributed to the world. however, it simply has nothing to do with darwinism.

Answer 7

The ego creates the stress in the world. The world/universe doesn't really exist. the ego makes you think all this exists. Then it gives you a bunch of problems so it can try to solve them and you'll think you have a need for it [ego]. Darwinism and the conflict over such ideas is just one example.

Cheers

Answer 8

everyone wants to stand out without a fallback option.... they get so wrapped up in the whole "i don't need anyone" mindset that they don't think anyone needs them. this effect is the REASON why no one in new york city will pass a smile or give a buck to the homeless guy on the street corner.

the world is too engrossed in competition. we focus on making our society more advanced, yet leave the laggers to fend for themselves. A society is judged by the bottom of its hiearchy. Our society is not advanced; it's barbaric. We need a spread of love.

Answer 9

Social Darwinism – divided by – Religion = 1

1 because they are congruently vile

Answer 10

People were doing that long before Darwin was born. Darwin simply provided a theory for "why".