Thursday, November 08, 2007


There is an interesting piece about Anthony Flew and eugenics. For those who don't know, Anthony Flew was rather famous as an atheist and is now rather famous as an ex-atheist. He is known for writing The Presumption of Atheism, an essay on why atheism is more a negative descriptor than a positive descriptor, that is to say that when I say that I am an atheist I mean only that I don't believe in God, not that I'm sure there is no God. He is, as noted before, no longer an atheist but a Deist.

The story of his "conversion" has struck me as somewhat sad, not because he decided to be a deist, but because of the way that a number of Christian authors jumped at the occasion of an older man finding Deism as an excuse to put words into his mouth. If you check out interviews with him it is clear that he gets confused easily and isn't at the top of his game mentally. So, of course, you have an unscrupulous Christian who uses this as a chance to push non-deist views.


On to my point though.

I was thinking about it and it seems that if someone thinks that humans are the result of intelligent design then doesn't it naturally follow that eugenics is okay? I say this because intelligent design essentially is eugenics. You know, some smart person/species guiding the genetic development of other species certainly sounds like eugenics to me.

No comments: