Evolution and its application

[Felch]

Originally posted by Theben
Such as sickle-cell anemia? You do realize that people with one set of the trait have greater immunity to malaria?

One man's disease is another's gift of life.

Check post #27. Thanks for agreeing with me.

[Provost Harrison]

Well I certainly wouldn't let the government check me!

[Felch]

Economist article: DARC link to AIDS

There's something else for you to chew on Theben. Even if you hate the source, it's got an interesting take.

[Felch]

Originally posted by Provost Harrison
Well I certainly wouldn't let the government check me!

I'm sorry, chequeueuesques, or however you lime-suckers spell it.

[Provost Harrison]

I just thought I'd cheque that you'd spelt it correctly

[Theben]

Originally posted by Felch
Check post #27. Thanks for agreeing with me.

Except you wrote that as a "response" that others could make to you. So I'm not agreeing with you.

Some people are keen on criticizing people (mostly Americans) who doubt the validity of Darwinism, and/or macro-evolution. How many of you are willing to decide public policy issues on that basis... [sic] I think that the overall benefits of a human race without genetic weakness outweigh the economic costs of the shortage in labor supply.

I definitely don't agree with this.

[BeBMan]

The entire "decide public policy issues on that basis" drive is nonsense. Politics as part of our civilization is the exact opposite of "nature". If you want to "apply" evolution in the sense that you guide a certain species to a certain end it's not evolution, but something else.

[Felch]

Originally posted by Theben
Except you wrote that as a "response" that others could make to you. So I'm not agreeing with you.

I wrote it, that makes it agreeing with me. I've often found that holding a couple contradictory viewpoints and debating between those is entertaining. That doesn't mean that I'm not sick in the head. :P

Some people are keen on criticizing people (mostly Americans) who doubt the validity of Darwinism, and/or macro-evolution. How many of you are willing to decide public policy issues on that basis... [sic] I think that the overall benefits of a human race without genetic weakness outweigh the economic costs of the shortage in labor supply.

I definitely don't agree with this.

I'm merely advocating mass murder in pursuit of a master race. What's so controversial?

EDIT: And making more money. Certainly you're sympathetic with the need for greater corporate profits.

[Felch]

New, related question.

If evolution is not appropriate for public policy applications, why does it matter if people are taught evolution in schools? I don't need to know organic chemistry to be a good citizen. What does it matter if I understand the origin of the species? Should evolutionary biology be deemphasized? Does it make any difference at all if people fall for nonsense like ID? (Assume that they will accept micro-evolution and its impact on antibiotics and such.)

[Provost Harrison]

Because knowledge and education is a good thing?

[Felch]

Why? Unless it's applied to make better citizens, it's a poor use of school resources. Does the issue of opportunity cost no longer apply?

[BeBMan]

Originally posted by Felch

If evolution is not appropriate for public policy applications, why does it matter if people are taught evolution in schools?

Since when is school limited to teaching stuff that is "appropriate for public policy applications"?

I don't need to know organic chemistry to be a good citizen.

True, but you also don't need much for that at all. Maybe you should advocate that schools get scrapped completely. I mean, what's the entire physics, math, literature etc. good for anyway. If people just sit in dark caves all day they can do no wrong and don't need to know stuff.

[Felch]

Originally posted by BeBro
Since when is school limited to teaching stuff that is "appropriate for public policy applications"?

Who cares? Can you explain why money should be spent teaching people about something that has virtually no relevance in our world? Why not spend that money curing cancer, or on malaria prevention in the third world?

True, but you also don't need much for that at all. Maybe you should advocate that schools get scrapped completely. I mean, what's the entire physics, math, literature etc. good for anyway. If people just sit in dark caves all day they can do no wrong and don't need to know stuff.

Wow, you totally just beat the crap out of that strawman. Are your arms tired? I'm not saying "Get rid of physics, math, and literature" because physics, math, and literature make for better citizens. Citizens who understand automobile safety, balancing budgets, and what somebody means when they say, "For Brutus is an honorable man." Teaching evolution is apparently worthless, because nobody is willing to use that knowledge to potentially benefit mankind.

[BeBMan]

Who cares?

[Lorizael]

We teach evolution in order to help build a more accurate model of the world around us. Evolution is useful for understanding biology, and biology is useful in the healthcare industry, the agricultural indutry, and probably a lot of other industries as well.

If you don't teach important biology concepts to students in school, they're not likely to be interested enough in the subjects to pursue them in greater detail in college.