Social Darwinism

Discussion in 'Philosophy' started by yurigadaisukida, Jun 27, 2015.

  1. What is morality? Is it moral to sacrifice an individual for society?

    Is it moral to take away individual rights in order to run society in a more effective way?

    Does it matter?

    Consider a hypothetical civilization.

    This society is similar to Spartans. There are social incentives for those who perform better. And those who are useless to society are culled. This society engages in population control, and redistribution of resources based on objective merit.

    This society is also warlike, and is able to conquer the world thanks to practices that lead them to have the strongest military and most effective economy.

    Most of us would view this civilization as evil. But if our society becomes extinct because it fails to compete with them, does it really matter?

    Regardless of social morality, eventually a dominant society will arise. Its just evolution.

    I believe a united one world government is inevitable. This is because eventually one type of society will win out over the others, and will need global control for survival of the species.

    I wonder what that society will look like

    -yuri
     
  2. #2 EsNero, Jun 27, 2015
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 27, 2015
    I rather think about humanity seperating themselves from animal behaviour and to have a true free society.


    We are more then empty meatsuits.
     
  3. define animal behavior

    All human joy is animal behavior

    We like food because we are hungry and have taste buds designed to make us like food so we will eat

    We feel love because we have sex hormones and family instincts for animal survival

    Our idea of fun is based on stimulating senses designed to help us survive such as adrenaline rush.

    Even our curiosity is animal.

    Are you saying we should be emotionless robots that do nothing but study science for no reason other than to know?


    -yuri
     
  4. We shouldn't let our animal emotions control us, absolutly not emotionless. Never mentioned science.
     
  5. I don't understand what you are trying to say

    We should embrace our animal but not let it control us? I agree

    -yuri
     
  6. Also you are voicing your moral opinion here.

    The thread is meant to discuss if your opinion is even relevent .

    Its nit a discussion of morality so much as the idea that the most effective society will rule regardless of morality

    -yuri
     
  7. Wouldn't the new society have its own set of morals that they find best?
     
  8. I think that's part of the point.

    None of our opinions matter because in the end the most successful society will whipe out or assimilate all others.

    Even if we end up living in little pods and having zero freedom, this would be considered best for society as a whole and therefore moral

    -yuri
     

Share This Page