I stumbled across the book Darwinian Conservatism by Larry Arnhart. The Introduction is online here (http://www.imprint.co.uk/books/Arnhart-intro.pdf).
Quote from: "Larry Arnhart"Conservatives need Charles Darwin. They need him because a Darwinian science of human nature supports conservatives in their realist view of human imperfectibility and their commitment to ordered liberty as rooted in nature, custom, and prudence. The intellectual vitality of conservatism in the twenty-first century will depend on the success of conservatives in appealing to advances in the biology of human nature as confirming conservative thought.
As the title might suggest, he's politically conservative. But unlike a lot of conservatives, he uses evolution to justify conservative political ideology. What I found interesting was realizing how controversial this idea is. As Arnhart points out, "Many conservatives regard Darwinian evolution as a key idea for a scientific materialism that is morally and politically corrupting because it denies the moral dignity of human beings as created in God’s image." I'm not about to become a Darwinian Conservative, or a conservative for that matter, but I might read the book.
It does sound interesting, I am curious about how Darwin's theory of evolution would support conservatism.
Using a scientific theory to justify political leanings sounds a bit dodgy to me (and I am conservative, at least economically).
Conservatives like low tax, business freedom, to allow people to shine, make lots of money, aspiration etc. Evolution is an observed process whereby the genetics of populations of animals change, because (by and large) some animals in that population are better suited to the conditions, and have more success mating. While both theories have a passing resemblance (up to you to succeed, competition etc), it does not follow that because Evolution is supported by a mountain of evidence, and accepted as a consensus of the scientific community, that running your economy in a conservative way is the best.
Maybe he makes some brilliant and revelatory argument in the book, but he would certainly need something pretty special to convince me that Evolution justifies conservative thinking. For example, the argument
"The planets travel in elliptical orbits
argument goes here
Means we should make the windows in our houses elliptical" Seems pretty silly, surely a better justification for elliptical windows is some structural or aesthetic property of the window, instead of a scientific theory that really has nothing to do with them.
Well I haven't read it yet. That humans descended from a common ancestor is relevant to philosophy and religion and perhaps to political ideology and in some cases outright damaging. Maybe this is an attempt to undo the damage? Will have my critical thinking hat on at all times.
Thought this was funny...but maybe it's just me:
(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi86.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fk86%2Fsolidsquid%2Fcoulterlol.jpg&hash=cc5878d114cf0a455a3dc73541444785ff1c876c)
Quote from: "Squid"Thought this was funny...but maybe it's just me:
Actually I got the same ad. I was quite amused also.