RE: [asa] fall of Satan logic questions (racism)

From: Dehler, Bernie <bernie.dehler@intel.com>
Date: Fri May 08 2009 - 12:06:42 EDT

I guess later humans could be called 'evolved' or 'devolved,' as the changes may be better or worse. Just like some breeds of dogs are known to have medical issues.

________________________________
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On Behalf Of dawson wayne
Sent: Thursday, May 07, 2009 5:01 PM
To: gregoryarago@yahoo.ca
Cc: ASA; Murray Hogg
Subject: Re: [asa] fall of Satan logic questions (racism)

2009/5/7 Gregory Arago <gregoryarago@yahoo.ca<mailto:gregoryarago@yahoo.ca>>
<<<To Murray's point about 'more evolved' not belonging in an intra-human context, unfortunately, the history of the social sciences does not bear out this perspective. The ideology of 'evolutionism' has been applied to suggest that Africans are indeed 'less evolved' than say Swedes or Danes. 'Less evolved' here means cutural *and* biological, like the 'co-evolutionists' might sugggest today (and like Dobzhansky and Huxley argued during the forming of the 'modern synthesis'). 20th century anthropology (e.g. Boas), however, rejected the linear process of human-social evolution. >>>

Man is not a rational animal, he is a rationalizing animal. --- Robert Heinlein (1953).

Whereas evolution has been used to rationalize beliefs like the, these are delusions of grandeur. Since making a living is considered a good measure of intelligence, then probably worms and horseshoe crabs have the most claim to success as animals on this planet.

At any rate, with 96% of the human genome in Africa, in fact, I can't think that most geneticists (scientists) could agree with you.

by Grace we proceed,
Wayne

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri May 8 12:07:08 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri May 08 2009 - 12:07:08 EDT