It isn't. Lamarck was well off the mark; Darwin had the right idea and was later shown to be right (or at least better than Lamarck) by the discovery of DNA and its function.
was darwinism an important aspect of what genre?
Lamarckism and Darwinism are not compatible because they propose different mechanisms for evolution. Lamarckism suggests that acquired traits can be passed down to offspring, while Darwinism proposes that natural selection acting on inherited variations drives evolution. The evidence overwhelmingly supports Darwinism as the main mechanism for evolution.
That is the correct spelling of the proper noun Darwinism. It refers to the theories of biologist Charles Darwin, specifically the survival of the fittest.
Neo-Darwinism incorporates modern genetic discoveries into Darwin's original theory of evolution by natural selection, emphasizing the role of genetic mutations and recombination in driving evolutionary change. This expanded understanding allows for a more comprehensive explanation of evolutionary processes than Darwin's initial ideas alone.
No, Andrew Carnegie was not known for being a leading spokesman against Darwinism. While he had some reservations about the application of Darwin's theories to society, he was not a vocal opponent of Darwinism. Carnegie was more focused on issues related to business, philanthropy, and social reform.
It led Europeans to believe that they were better than Asians and Africans.
It led Europeans to believe that they were better than Asians and Africans
Darwinism.
The concept of Social Darwinism favors and is often favored by the aristocracy, or the rich and elite. Social Darwinism states that affluent people are well off is because they are better or more evolved and smarter than the economically disadvantaged population.
was darwinism an important aspect of what genre?
Satan is the modern-day champion of Darwinism.
Social Darwinism affected ww1 because people believed they were better than Russians and other European countries, because of social darwinism people could justify their cruel actions and feel ok about it. Social Darwinism was taken wayyy too far out of context than what Charles Darwin intended it. the belief in Darwinism caused rivalries between the different countries.
it helps solve social, political, and ecumenical issues. :)
Manifest destiny and social Darwinism were used to justify horrible actions toward minority peoples during the 1800s. Manifest destiny was the idea that the US should expand westward, and was used to steal Native American lands. Social Darwinism was the idea that the lighter skinned people were, the better they were. It was used to justify institutional racism.
This is how Hitler used social Darwinism. He showed videos of animals killing the weaker to promote this idea. He viewed Jews as a weaker species, so he killed them. He also view old or crippled people as weak and thus, useless to society, so he killed them. Hitler believed that Germans were the superior race. To Hitler there was no point to keeping 'weaklings' alive because they were a burden to society and they 'spoiled' the human species. Note: The name 'Social Darwinism' is misleading, Darwin had nothing to do with Social Darwinism, he taught that animals with the right characteristics survived, those without died, NOT animals killing each other for survival (survival of the fittest).
It refers to the belief in Evolution. See also:What do religious people answer to Darwinism?
Social Darwinism.