Monday, May 05, 2008

All of the things that Darwin wasn't

I stumbled across this around a week ago, but I'm only posting it now because I'm still in recovery mode from my latest school year (passed everything, one more year to go. Yay!). This is my more substantial post, and it involves someone whom I used to admire, or at least like. Mr. Stein tries his best to appear respectful, or at least sympathetic, to the point he's practically begging for respect. But he refers to Darwin's theories as "a great, great relic from the age of imperialism in the 19th century". He states that Darwin had no explanation for gravity, well guess what.
You're right, he never did, he never said that he did. Darwin's theories are concentrated on one particular area of science: Biology. He did not write about quantum physics, thermodynamics, or even THE ORIGIN OF LIFE. He simply was not a physicist, and never claimed that he was. There is one question I would have for you. Should we reject the Bible (one or both Testaments) outright, because IT HAD NOTHING TO SAY on any of those things I just listed?! Hmmm? Huh? Nudge! Nudge!!

Another question for you, "Doctor" Stein, you claimed that scientific advance was largely responsible for the Holocaust (Another review). It's true enough, much of the atrocities committed by the Nazis were hardly possible in the 19th century, and the research on nuclear warfare (by different nations, good and bad) was largely inspired by the work of a real physicist, who happened to be Jewish and was able to leave Nazi Germany. He was later reputed to have said that if he had known then what he knows now, he would have stuck with his family's watchmaking business (I believe that his name also rhymes with "Frankenstein"). Do you know who I'm talking about?

One thing that I learned in school this year was that for all of the scientific and technological advances and rational thought for political organization that we've had since the Enlightenment may have been intended for the betterment of humankind, but it is true that they can be used for the most perverse ends. No matter how far we've come, we pretty much end up in the same place, like Sisyphus. If your problem is with the concept of "progress" then I would be more understanding, but if your problem is with science in general, then I would suggest that you make the same bargain as Goethe's "Faust" (I haven't actually read it, but I get the general idea of it, feel free to ask me what I do know) or if you still would like to use your apparently enormous intellect, then drop out of society and live like Wordsworth or any other artist of the Romantic Age.

No comments: