Subscribe to Listverse
Books are one of our greatest resources, but many times in history books have been written which are misleading or untrue. In some cases this has lead to widescale death and destruction and evil governmental regimes.
This is a list of ten of the worst books of this type – books that have done more harm than good. The common thread in all of these books is deception – invariably not intentional, but the consequences are the same regardless.
I have intentionally left off some of the more obvious choices – as they will almost certainly come up in the comments. This list is in no particular order.
On the list because: It inflamed witch hunts across Europe
Malleus Maleficarum (The Hammer of Witchraft) was a manual for witch hunters and judges to catch witches and stamp them out. It came out just prior to the protestant reformation and it was one of the most popular books amongst the reformers who were wanting to smash “evil” out of their countries. Between 1487 and 1520, twenty editions of the Malleus were published, and another sixteen editions were published between 1574 to 1669. This book single-handedly launched centuries of witch hunts.
On the list because: it turned out to be a creation of her own sexual confusions and aspirations
Margaret Mead was an American cultural anthropologist who traveled to Samoa to answer the questions on sexuality posed in America in the 1920s (particularly with reference to women). Unfortunately for Mead, the youths she interviewed in Samoa told her wild tales of sexual promiscuity and Mead reported it all as fact. One of the girls later said: “She must have taken it seriously, but I was only joking. As you know, Samoan girls are terrific liars when it comes to joking. But Margaret accepted our trumped up stories as though they were true.” If challenged by Mead, the girls would not have hesitated to tell the truth, but Mead never questioned their stories. According to Wikipedia: “The use of cross-cultural comparison to highlight issues within Western society was highly influential, and contributed greatly to the heightened awareness of Anthropology and Ethnographic study in the USA.” Interestingly, Mead was a highly regarded academic and had a large part in the formulation of the 1979 American Book of Common Prayer (Church of England).
On the list because: it was the inspiration for a long list of tyrannies (Stalin had it on his nightstand)
The Prince is a treatise meant for rulers who had shed all scruples – to a point that they might see evil as potentially more beneficial to society than good. Machiavelli hoped to start a revolution in the hearts of his readers, and he certainly achieved that. He proudly stated things that others before him had only dared to whisper, and he whispered things that had not even been considered. According to Machiavelli “it is not necessary for a prince to have all the above-mentioned qualities [merciful, faithful, humane, honest, and religious], but it is indeed necessary to appear to have them. Nay, I dare say this, that by having them and always observing them, they are harmful; and by appearing to have them they are useful.” Some of the people inspired by this book are Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini, and Napoleon I of France.
On the list because: it helped spread Hitler’s genocidal anti-Semitism
In Mein Kampf, Hitler outlined his racist plan for a new Germany which included mass murder of Jews, and a war against France and Russia to make living space for Germans. At the time of publication the book was largely ignored, but once Hitler rose to power that changed. It is believed that over 10 million copies were in circulation in 1945. The book is largely influenced by The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind by Gustave Le Bon (1895) which suggested propaganda as a means to controlling the irrational behavior of crowds. In addition, Hitler drew on the fabricated Protocols of the Elders of Zion to give support for the need for his anti-semitic plans. Hitler speaks of “The Jewish Peril” which he believed was a conspiracy by Jews to take over the world. The book outlines the racial worldview in which people are classified by race as superior or inferior. In 2003 the sequel to Mein Kampf, Zweites Buch, was published in English for the first time. Zweites Buch (Second Book) expands on the original ideas of Mein Kampf and outlines further plans for a war with the United States and the British Empire for entire world domination by Germany.
On the list because: it preaches eugenics
Margaret Sanger is the mother of modern contraception and the founder of Planned Parenthood. In her 1922 book, The Pivot of Civilization, she outlined her theories of eugenics (control of the human race by selective breeding) and racial purity (3 years before Hitler did the same in Mein Kampf). The basis of her support of contraception was entirely due to her belief that inferior humans should be killed to enable a superior race to appear over time. Sanger did not just entertain popular ideas of her time – she was the champion of the cause. In her book she says: “the most urgent problem of to-day is how to limit and discourage the over-fertility of the mentally and physically defective.” She goes on to say: “possibly drastic and Spartan methods may be forced upon American society if it continues complacently to encourage the chance and chaotic breeding that has resulted from our stupid, cruel sentimentalism.” Birth control was, in her mind, “the greatest and most truly eugenic method.” Needless to say, Planned Parenthood today have tried very hard to distance themselves from their founder.
On the list because: it convinced the world that education is not about facts
In Democracy and Education, Dewey disparages schooling that focuses on traditional character development and endowing children with hard knowledge, and encourages the teaching of thinking “skills” instead. His views have had great influence on the direction of American education–particularly in public schools. This book could be considered to be the anti-classical education manifesto. And the consequence? A generation of youths with an inferior education which lacks a founding in solid facts and knowledge. Dewey was one of the three founders of the philosophical school of Pragmatism – a school of thought which proposes that “truth” is made and can change. The current curriculum in New Zealand is one which would please Dewey immensely as it is largely founded on his principles.
On the list because: it caused deaths through bad advice
Regardless of whether you agree with the methodology of Spock, no one can deny that many children probably died of cot death as a result of his advice to put babies to sleep on their stomachs. This advice was extremely influential on health-care providers, with nearly unanimous support through to the 1990s. Spock believed that babies on their back can choke on their own vomit – leading to death. Scientists eventually found that Spock’s advice actually lead to more deaths by suffocation. Estimates of the number of deaths caused by this bad advice are as many as 50,000. Spock also advocated a method of child raring that moved away from discipline based methods. Previously, experts had told parents that babies needed to learn to sleep on a regular schedule, and that picking them up and holding them whenever they cried would only teach them to cry more and not to sleep through the night. Spock taught the exact opposite.
On the list because: it was a propaganda book designed to incite racial hatred
The Protocols of the Elders of Zion is a booklet that purports to describe a plot by world Jewry and Masonry to take over the world. Despite the fact that the booklet is a hoax, it was spread wide and far and believed by most Europeans to be true. Many people today still consider it be factual. It was instrumental to Hitler’s anti-Jewish efforts in Germany and it was used after the Russian Revolution to perpetrate hatred and violence against Jews. The booklet continues to be published and disseminated in many Middle Eastern states which are political enemies of Israel.
On the list because: it could win the award for the most malicious book ever written
This book has inspired some of the most brutal regimes in man’s history. Regardless of whether there has been a state which is a true Marxist state, this book has inspired so many evil actions that it can not be left off a list of this nature. Some of the principles found in the manifesto are the abolition of private ownership of land, confiscation of property of emigrants, heavy taxes, and the abolition of inheritance.
On the list because: It fuels fundamentalist attacks on Science
By arguing against aspects of Darwin’s theories, this book has given fuel to the fundamentalists who argue that a literal interpretation of the Book of Genesis is the only possible manner in which the earth was created. Despite much refutation from the Scientific community, many fundamentalists still use this as a “source” for proof that evolution is not true. The book itself was not peer reviewed as Behe claimed under oath, and the Science community has overwhelming rejected it. It should be noted that Behe himself is not a fundamentalist and does not believe in a literal interpretation of the Bible.
May 14th, 2008 at 7:32 am
Great list. Mead’s book really is funny. When reading it, the stories about sex from the locals seem far-fetched. Despite being refuted as bad anthropology practices, this book is still taught in many Cultural Anthropology classes.
May 14th, 2008 at 7:42 am
Interesting list. I rather enjoyed it. Some of these sound rather interesting. I kind of would like to read them.
May 14th, 2008 at 7:45 am
Nice list. It’s a good thing I haven’t read any of these books, right?
Also, this list is SO asking for a war in the comments.
May 14th, 2008 at 7:45 am
I take it you deliberately left off religious texts then
Quite an interesting list. I might have a read of ‘Darwin’s Black Box’, it always amuses me how people can take science, deform it out of all recognition, then spout it as truth.
May 14th, 2008 at 7:47 am
JwJwBean: you should – they have their merit historically
May 14th, 2008 at 7:48 am
Great list.One book that has spawned some deaths is The Turner Diaries,the book that Tomothy Mcviegh had in his car when he was caught after the OK. bombing.And I guess one could argue that The Bible could be on this list as well.
May 14th, 2008 at 7:53 am
This is really interesting, there’s bound to be hell in the comments, but controversial lists are always the most interesting. I’ll try to have a look at some of these if I can.
And good call leaving off the religious lists!
May 14th, 2008 at 7:56 am
This is a good list! I’ve never heard of the first one, suprisingly…
May 14th, 2008 at 7:57 am
Best list in a long time! I really mean that.
I like the inclusion of Sanger’s book. Feminist and radical leftists have succeed in making her out to be some kind of defender of a woman’s right to chose. Far too few people know enough about her true nature and what she was really trying to do.
May 14th, 2008 at 7:58 am
#4
“Previously, experts had told parents that babies needed to learn to sleep on a regular schedule, and that picking them up and holding them whenever they cried would only teach them to cry more and not to sleep through the night. Spock taught the exact opposite.”
He was right for this one.
The common belief up until recently was that you will “spoil” your child if you pick them up and comfort them.
There is a new movement, one in which the health care field is starting to become fairly fond of called “Attachment parenting.”
There has been no evidence the children who are picked up and comforted do not attain a regular sleep pattern or become needy. Infact, they are more secure and confident.
Now I’m running out of steam, I’m gonna stop writing
May 14th, 2008 at 7:59 am
you should dishonorable mention all books like the bible, koran, etc.
May 14th, 2008 at 8:00 am
Kreachure: yep
dangorironhide: yep
May 14th, 2008 at 8:24 am
jfrater: I’m not sure whether you’ve read Darwin’s Black Box, but Behe is a noted biochemist who believes in evolution and common descent. He completely disassociates himself from the creationist movement. While he is entirely wrong, and culpable for the wave of anti-science in the US, he actually argues for evolution, and his argumets have to do solely with irreducible complexity i.e the theory that some organisms are too complex to have evolved incrimentally. He’s wrong, but not a Creationist. They mainly use stuff like Duane Gish’s ‘The Fossils Say No’ or ‘Darwin on Trial’.
May 14th, 2008 at 8:26 am
Longtime reader, first-time poster.
Including Machiavelli on the list is certainly an interesting choice. I just finished taking a class on the text, and while you definitely touched on the most difficult aspect of Machiavelli’s treatise (The “Appearing to be noble being superior to true nobility” part), Machiavelli also spoke of the need to treat the common people with respect. In Chapter XX, “On the Various forms of Defensive Structures and Their Uses,” he states that “The strongest fortress is built upon the love and loyalty of one’s own people.” Machiavelli himself was not a proponent of genocide or overwhelming cruelty. Rather, he was pragmatic, saying that morality takes a backseat to security. Italy int he 1500s was hiring Swiss mercenaries and constantly falling victim to incoming invasions, primarily because the influence of the Papacy was promoting “moral” leadership, which at the time included a lack of military build-up, the notion that the ruling classes were entirely superior to the peasant classes, and promoted an opulent lifestyle for the Nobles.
But you’re point definitely still stands. I personally like Machiavelli extensively, almost as much as listverse.
By the way, came across Machiavelli when he read about Otto von Bismark, who kept a copy on his nightstand as well.
May 14th, 2008 at 8:26 am
What’s wrong with Democracy and Education?
sounds fine to me
May 14th, 2008 at 8:26 am
I’ve never heard of #1. I guess I’m confused why a book about Darwinism that’s been mostly rejected would screw up the world more than Mein Kampf or The Communist Manifesto, which seemed to play large roles in some pretty major events in history (ie WW2, the Soviet Union).
May 14th, 2008 at 8:26 am
I love how people will seize upon any chance to attack religion.
The reason that books like the Bible and Koran are not on this list is because these books (and truly, the Bible is not a “book”, it is several books) were not writen with the sole intent to promote evil. Indeed, the Bible (”do unto others…”, “turn the other cheek…”) the Koran (”the Jews and the Christians will have their places in Heaven”) present very good directives to live your life well.
Of course, that matters little to those whose hobby it is to disparage the beliefs of others due to their own egocentrism and belief in self-superiority. If you need evidence of this, just ask yourselves how you would respond when some other ignorant soul suggests that “On the Origin of the Species” be included on this list.
They could claim (falsely) that it has led to genocide, ethnocentrism, and any number of ills, because they do not understand the work. The same is true for the anti-religion crowd. I have met very few people who can argue against religion from a strictly logical standpoint. It always devolves into emotion. Of course, the ultimate irony to the anti-religion crowd is that they claim to dislike religion on the grounds that they do not want someone dictating their lives and actions, and yet they will allow me to do so by baiting them into a conversation that I can pretty accurately predict on a forum board.
Free will indeed.
May 14th, 2008 at 8:27 am
My question is what do you burn apart from witches?
May 14th, 2008 at 8:28 am
Great List! I haven’t read many of these and I never even heard of a few of them. But, it’s always interesting to me how people are just as inspired by words of hate as they are by the words of love.
I would definitely mention the Turner Diaries as a very recent example, but I don’t think it could replace any of these on the list.
May 14th, 2008 at 8:28 am
With “The Prince” and “The Communist Manifesto” it’s all about how you interpret them. I had to read both of them for a political science class, and I can see how they can be used for evil, but also, perhaps for good. Maybe I’m just a ridiculous optimist, but I think that Marx honestly felt that his book could not be taken in the way that Stalin took it.
May 14th, 2008 at 8:29 am
While the disbelief in Evolution is scientifically weak I wouldn’t say it’s the worst propaganda on the list, in fact, I’d say it’s the least harmful out of the ten.
Eugenics, racism and tyranny cause more problems than someone believing the world is only 6000 years old
May 14th, 2008 at 8:30 am
you forgot the bible, no joke…I havnt met a single person that has had their life actually made “better” by the bible..but millions of people for hundreds of years have been killed because of stuff written in the bible
May 14th, 2008 at 8:31 am
bucslim: easy question! The answer is, of course, books!
Thewalkindude: you are probably right – but the manifesto principles are anti-freedom and I think that regardless of Marx’s intentions, he had to have a flawed perspective to think that it is better for people to have their freedom taken from them – who benefits from that? Despots.
ChrisM: let us not forget that the rejection of evolution as a possibility based solely on a fundamentalist interpretation of the Bible has lead many people to try to have discussion of it removed from school curricula – it is pretty bad when any group tries to suppress open debate.
May 14th, 2008 at 8:34 am
I like the list. It might be helpful to you to do a quick revision of a few sections. There are some mixed phrases and mispellings.
The Dewey book seems a little out of place here especially since many of the theories and practices he advocates are still being debated. You pointed to New Zealand as a place that applies his theories. I suppose it goes to refute the fact that the book has negative effects when you highlight a place in which it is doing some amazing things (i.e. highest literacy rate). I think the list in general was well done.
May 14th, 2008 at 8:35 am
Cre: There are a few books on this list that were not written with the “sole intent to promote evil” as you say. The criteria states that these books were misleading and/or untrue. Knowing that, I think the Bible along with other religious texts, could certainly fit the bill.
May 14th, 2008 at 8:36 am
Hey what about Mao’s Little Red book? Thats DEFINITELY a book that screwed up the lives of 1 out of 6 people on earth in the 20th century.
And what about the Bible, Koran, the Hadith, Torah, and other religious texts? Its not so much the texts themselves, but people’s interpretations, but yeah. They definitely could be understood as screwing up the world.
May 14th, 2008 at 8:38 am
Nicowarrior: the problem is rejecting fact based education – some things are objectively true and to deny that is seriously wrong. The results in New Zealand from 10 years of this type of education system (where there are no tests because everyone passes) has given rise to a generation of uneducated people. Even reading abilities are dropping massively.
May 14th, 2008 at 8:44 am
CRE – well said
bucslim – wood, which floats, but what else floats?
Notable ommission – Are You There God? It’s Me, Margaret. There were things in that book that definately screwed up my little boy world. You cannot unread.
May 14th, 2008 at 8:44 am
Nice list, but the Bible has to top the list. No book has completely FU humanity like it has. Science has showed that when a believer thinks about his faith, the reason part of his brain gets inhibited. The more “practice” a believer gets in thinking about faith, the more likely the reason center becomes inhibited in all matters, not just religion. In fact, there’s a great series of experiments at Standford that shows that you can literally take a believer, inject this part of the brain with the appropriate neurotransmitter, and he stops believing. Belief is a form of mental illness. It is the single greatest threat to the human species.
May 14th, 2008 at 8:44 am
Ya noticed that there were no religious texts listed here. Understandably because what that would’ve touched off.
But seriously, more deaths/murders/etc were conducted in the name of religion/pickyourgod than anything else.
May 14th, 2008 at 8:46 am
I don’t think the books were evil. Some of the writers might have been. I also think that what happens because of the book depends on who reads it and the way they interpret it and what they do with it. The same goes for all the religious books being refrenced in the comments. I wonder if anyone has been evilly influenced by Green Eggs and Ham yet. Hmm it is telling me to relentlessly bother someone until they try what I like because it will make them like it (regardless is they actually do or not). Yeah, Yeah. I will have to follow that book now.
May 14th, 2008 at 8:49 am
I thought the answer was more witches.
May 14th, 2008 at 8:53 am
I have to read most of these. I hope they aren’t too hard to find.
May 14th, 2008 at 8:57 am
Blaming the Bible, or any book for the actions of someone who mis-reads or mis-interprets it is like accusing David Berkowitz’s neighbor’s dog of murder.
May 14th, 2008 at 9:01 am
You are incorrect in your synopsis of “Darwin’s Black Box” and its author, Michael Behe. He does not believe in a literal 7-day creation story. I have read it. I take it you haven’t. But to say that it claims “a literal interpretation of the Book of Genesis is the only possible manner in which the earth was created” is a misrepresentation. Behe seems to be an old-earth, pseudo-creationist.
May 14th, 2008 at 9:01 am
ive never read any of these. =/
May 14th, 2008 at 9:03 am
This is the kind of list that keeps coming back to the list universe. Very educational and is very different from a book with the same title. Although some of the obvious books are the same.
I know someone suggested this in a previous comment but when the list is in no particular order maybe they should be numbered 1-10. This would be a sign for everyone that it is a random list.
Just a suggestion. Thanks for another interesting list.
May 14th, 2008 at 9:06 am
I have to defend the prince here. If anything, you’re shooting the messenger.
It’s more a treatise on political cynicism and yes, tyranny (It was written in the middle ages, remember), and I think it’s a really healthy read for any person interested in politics. If anything, this book, in the hand of the people, should teach them to see the tyrants where they are and not to trust the political “showbusiness”.
In the end, the Prince just provides a very clean and cold-blooded analysis of how to rule efficiently. Well, it’s Machiavelli’s interpretation based on his own, medieval knowledge. It’s political science – observation – and not a moral standpoint. Machiavelli didn’t create tyrants, tyrants just used his book for their own ends. If you look deep enough, you’ll probably find that many “good” politicians also read the book, and that a lot of them think it’s a great book too.
In the end, if you wanna blame the actions of some people on books, you always can, but on that level, I think many holy books would need to be placed on the list too.
May 14th, 2008 at 9:06 am
It would certainly be more effective to put up The Bible than any auxillary text used by the YECists [Young-Earth Creationists]. Despite some messages of good, most of it is filled with xenophobia.
The Koran presents its own problems: According to my Myth & Folklore professor, Ayatollah Khomeini was “very close” to what the Koran actually said.
If you’re going to include The Communist Manifesto, The Bible and Koran are guilty on the same basis.
May 14th, 2008 at 9:14 am
JF-site isn’t letting me go to this list when i log in????\
ALL- Darwin’s Black Box, eh, I will have to read it. Sounds interesting. Is it categorized as fiction or Nonfiction?
Mark – Where can i find access to this Stanford Experiment results? I am curious if thats complete bullshit like any religious person who *actually believes* would say or if there is some bit of truth to it somewhere. I think the whole idea that you can change a persons beliefs is crap and if they weere a true believer and follower it would not be possible.
May 14th, 2008 at 9:17 am
Everything You’ve Always Wanted To Know About Sex But Were Afraid To Ask by Dr. David Rueben. Its mega-phobic and hateful chapter on homosexuality where gay people are described sick doomed perverts kept me in the closet an extra 5 years.
May 14th, 2008 at 9:18 am
TBone: I didn’t say he believed in it – I said his book fuels the belief in it due to refuting aspects of Darwin’s theories.
May 14th, 2008 at 9:18 am
longball: what do you mean?
May 14th, 2008 at 10:13 am
to all the guys out there blasting religious books:
i think that blaming all the evils on the world on religious texts is lazy and inaccurate. Whilst you might focus on the topics or passages which you perceive as hate speech or war mongering, you ignore all the good humanly advice in these texts.
Poverty is challenged by encouraging charity, Demoralization is challenged by chastity, greed is challenged by helping less fortunate and the list of solutions to evils is endless.
I challenge you to read any of the three major holy books (Bible, Torah and Quraan)pondering over its meaning and implementing the good advises in it and then tell me if those books really screwed up the world or made a positive effect on the removal of evil.
Mr Charles Darwin’s influence and Karl Marx and on tyrants such as Hitler, Staling and Mussolini cannot even come close to any fundamentalist who killed in the name of his religion.
May 14th, 2008 at 10:26 am
Yeah Sangers book was definately, definately evil. I think that and “Mein Kamph” should of definately surpassed “Darwin’s Black Box”.
There is no way to justify eugenics and racial hatred, not at all. DBB is just a belief in the ever-changing world of paradigms. What was the “truth” in 1800 is no longer the truth today, just as what was considered to be the truth in 1600 was all but dismissed by 1800.
Sanger and Hitler, on the other hand, championed eliminating or stifling entire races or types of people.
May 14th, 2008 at 10:26 am
Hey, you missed a very important one:
THE HARRY POTTER BOOKS!
Thanks to those, we got our kids running around with brooms pretending to be witches and wizards, and calling people muggles and calling out spells, and believing in magic, and wanting to go to that wizard school, and the dragons and the unicorns and the Quidditch and the Dark Arts and the plot twists and the boom-boom and the hoobie-dobbie-blagahblah– WORK OF THE DEVIL, I TELLS YA!
May 14th, 2008 at 10:37 am
The Bible has as much right or more the the Manifesto to be on the list.
May 14th, 2008 at 10:38 am
I’ll admit I have not read “Democracy and Education” but honestly, it doesn’t appear to be all that bad. I agree with the spirit of the book: critical thinking skills are more useful and more conducive to providing a proper working education than hard facts. I think the problem comes when the emphasis on fact is removed *completely*, which sounds like what happened. Of course facts have a place in education, and a big one at that. But if you think that memorizing a bunch of facts about something makes you somehow smarter or more educated, you are sorely mistaken. The thought processes of education and learning are infinitely more valuable than the information itself. That’s why one goes to college or university: it’s not to learn the information so much as its to gain the knowledge and skills on how to find the information if and when you need it, and how to interpret it in a way that is useful. That being said, I certainly don’t think including “Democracy and Education” in this list and excluding “The Turner Diaries” was a good move.
Secondly, while I wholeheartedly agree with Behe’s book being an annoying source of fuel for creationists, I doubt it deserves the #1 spot on a list of books that have screwed up the world. The problem with the “Black Box” is that it a book that finally gives what creationists feel is some sort of scientific rebuttal against evolution in the face of detractors that criticize creationism for it’s non-scientific approach. They feel it offers them some degree of legitimancy. The biggest problem is, to this day, you have creationists citing Behe’s book in their arguments, even though whole TOMES have been written systematically breaking down each and every one of Behe’s arguments and proven them false or misleading. Yes, it’s bothersome and silly, but has it screwed up the world? That’s up for debate.
Also…while some might find the idea of eugenics abhorrant, I find it logical, if it is applied with the proper intent (that is, strengthening the gene pool by filtering out inheritable genetic discrepancies). I certainly don’t take the idea seriously, and I don’t believe anyone should have to die because of it. However, I don’t think “The Pivot of Civilization” was such an evil book just because it states in blunt terms what many have speculated and whispered about for generations. It’s interesting in conjecture and theory, rather like the Communist Manifesto, and also like the Manifesto, would be likely to fail in practice for no other reason than our own corruptibilty. This might be an unpopular opinion around here.
May 14th, 2008 at 10:39 am
The Bible has as much right, or perhaps more than the Manifesto to be on the list.
May 14th, 2008 at 10:39 am
“My question is what do you burn apart from witches?”
More witches!!!
Ehh: You’re an idiot. More people killed in the last century in the name of secularism than killed in the name of Christ in all of history.
May 14th, 2008 at 10:41 am
And also…please…please people, give up the whole religious text thing. It’s not clever or smart, and those books have done as or more good than harm. Much like others on this list, the book itself is not what screwed up the world…it was the falacious interpretations of unscrupulous people that screwed up the world.
May 14th, 2008 at 10:46 am
Of course, wars are often fought with the motto being raised by all sides that ” we will win, we must win, as we have secularism on our side”. Also, the thing about commentary is it should be kept impersonal and respectful, as it is being done after all electronically and facelessly, eh Bob? Otherwise you come off as being a bit of an internet tough guy, you know what I mean?
May 14th, 2008 at 10:59 am
Bob: I’d be interested to see your sources on that statement.
May 14th, 2008 at 11:00 am
Note to Joel – these are not in any particular order, as outlined in bold at the top.
Excellent list, I’ve never heard of some of these so I will have to look into it.
One question on “Coming of Age in Samoa.” The description says that the stories are from girls who exaggerated their wild tales but it also says that they are Mead’s own sexual confusions and aspirations. I haven’t read the book yet so I’m not sure which it is. Did Mead make up the stories or did she report the Samoans’ exaggerated stories and add her own thoughts in there? I’m confused.
May 14th, 2008 at 11:01 am
No Bible or Quran???
May 14th, 2008 at 11:02 am
here’s one that may get some folk’s panties in a bunch.
THE KORAN. that rag has inspired centuries of bloodshed by the most evil cult in all of history.
May 14th, 2008 at 11:03 am
padraig: i agree with being respectful, but ehh’s comment was pretty idiotic.
bob: you beat me to it!! i was reading all the comments and couldn’t believe that nobody was finishing that line correctly. “ohhhh. who are you that are so wise in the ways of sciencec”
jayfray: i would agree with whoever said that you should have “in no particular order” in really big letters. i was all set to get going about black box being number 1 when i was reminded of the intro.
ehh: never met ONE person positively effected by the Bible. either you are living under a rock or you are seriously blinded by your bias.
May 14th, 2008 at 11:06 am
oh yeah…(how did i forget to address this one?)
mark: (#29) do you realize that you just said that anyone with religous beliefs is mentally handicapped? please provide some sort of reference to this over the top accusation.
May 14th, 2008 at 11:10 am
I’d tend to disagree with his statement as well. My point is that I have noticed that people , especially dudes for some reason, tend to comport themselves differently online than they would in real life, throw around alot of language they would not use otherwise. Strikes me as bad debate technique at best, cowardly at worst.
May 14th, 2008 at 11:11 am
I just knew it wouldn’t take long for folks to bring up the bible. I’m sure jfrater knew the same thing which makes this site so entertaining!
When I hear people talk about the evils of the bible and how dangerous the bible is I sometimes ask this question: If you were in a dark alley and you saw several large men heading toward you, would you be a little relieved to know that they were just leaving from their weekly bible study? I know that the some moral relativism people out there are thinking hey, those bible study people could be trying to give me poison cool aid or drown my kids in a bathtub because God told them to do so. I hear this all the time from some friends of mine. They will point out the crusades, or hypocritical TV evangelists etc. So they choose to throw the baby out with the bathwater and are convinced that all bible reading or religious people are crazy gullible people. Can’t we take in consideration the imperfection of man himself and not blame it all on religion or a holy book? Most religions & religious books teach peace and look to improve the world in positive ways. Mans belief and faith in his or her religion has been the inspiration of so many wonderful and beautiful things such as music, literature, architecture and has helped to build hospitals, schools and countless other things we just take for granted. I know the anti religious the agnostics the atheists want the same things as religious people and that’s a peaceful world. Believers and non believers can both take credit for many atrocities throughout history but when I think about living in a world with no religion and no faith I just think what a drab drab world that would be.
May 14th, 2008 at 11:11 am
BishopWhiteT: ducks float therefore if she weighs the same as a duck….SHE’S A WITCH!!!!
May 14th, 2008 at 11:18 am
Slick (and others):
DEMOCRACY AND EDUCATION.
Okay, here’s why it’s bad.
We are still living, in large part, in an educational world influenced by and cut from the cloth of Dewey. Not as much as when I was a kid, but still… and if you take a minute and look around, you find wherever you look an education system that is nowhere near as efficient or productive as it once was. When my parents went to school, in the 30s/40s, they could graduate (from high school) and would have the equivalent of a college education today, at any decent quality college. Now granted, we have more to learn today–science has advanced, and computers have entered the scene. We also don’t limit ourselves to only the thoughts and viewpoints of dead white males (though sometimes we do discard them too readily in favor of less interesting substitutes). Nevertheless, what our parents were exposed to was far more deep (if not always quite as broad) than what we were exposed to in school.
Dewey laid the groundwork for this watering down of education. The point he had was that it IS the job of educators to teach people how to THINK, primarily… not to teach them “stuff.” (which is secondary, but necessary). But it quickly became forgotten that these two aims need to mesh together, and that the teaching of “stuff” can affect one’s ability to learn and think just as much as direct instruction in the processes of thinking.
And so, today, my children receive a very rudimentary and uninspiring education. It’s up to me, as a parent, to supplement that, if I want them to advance. Not a bad thing, surely–but not every parent is equipped as I am to educate their children in all the broad categories which are imperatives for them. Before Dewey, it could be expected that schools and teachers would not only introduce kids to learning things they would not otherwise encounter—but to offer actual instruction in these topics. The introductions were much more than peripheral and the instruction was far more than superficial. Yet today the best they can hope for is the very peripheral and the highly superficial… at best.
The telling issue here is this: I am 43 years old, and thus was in school from 1970 – 1983. I have three siblings who are considerably older than me… from 10 years to 15 years older. I had occasion, once, to gain access to some textbooks which my brothers had used in the 50s – mid 60s. (In fact, I still have a few of them). Now, while these textbooks were, by our standards today, rather Eurocentric and narrow in viewpoint, they nevertheless read like college textbooks, and not at all like upper-elementary and high school books. I was shocked to discover what my siblings were being exposed to and actually *learning* when they were, oh… 10-18 years old.
By the time I got to school, however, Dewey had had his influence, and we instead got a watered down “Social Studies” instead of History, and the “new math” instead of traditional mathematics. The old English curriculum had almost completely been discarded and we read (and kids today read even worse stuff) very rudimentary and blah texts. Where my brothers and sister had read classics, the closest thing WE got to a “classic” was John Steinbeck (I, by the way, detest Steinbeck and feel he’s a very inferior writer—but the point is, THEY were reading things that I wasn’t compelled to read until college, if then).
Now, yes…. education was perhaps too regimental and rigid then. Perhaps. But what we can clearly see is that more and more kids, over the years, have gotten a short shrift compared to what their parents and grandparents got. We learn a wider variety of things, today…. but kids only get their toes in, at best.
We have Dewey to thank for the discarding of substance in favor of process. And the result? Our kids are far behind Europeans and Asians in math and science, watch Hollywood movies in class in lieu of actual instruction, and security is a greater concern in our schools than education.
May 14th, 2008 at 11:23 am
@Slickwilly
This is the first time that I post, but I have to point out that although Eugenetics seems logical, it is not. I’ve taken applied genetics as a course this semester and it is complex but it is almost impossible to select a disease out of a population. This is because of the fact that there are for more people who bear mutated genes but don’t have the disease. So the bad genes stay in the population.
May 14th, 2008 at 11:36 am
First off, the list is in no particular order.
Secondly, religous texts, regardless of the good that have come from them, have spawned more evil than ANY other book, essay, poem, collection of books etc…I’m not going to debate anyone’s belief system or how others have applied these texts to their everyday lives which have had positive outcomes. I am simply stating that throughout history countless atrocities have been committed based on what was interpreted from these texts. That is an indisputable fact!
May 14th, 2008 at 11:39 am
While Machiavelli may have given potential dictators a how-to guide for staying in power, he was actually in favor of republics, believing them to be the best governments in terms of long-term stability. I’d recommend reading Machiavelli’s “Discourses on Livy” (sometimes published as just “The Discourses”) along with The Prince if you want to get a good feel for Machiavelli’s way of thinking.
Darwin’s Black Box doesn’t seem to merit inclusion in this list. Its impact was nowhere near that of the other entries on the list, and the ideas it contains are not even that groundbreaking. Furthermore, since it has been to a large extent discredited, proponents of intelligent design have moved on.
As for the Communist Manifesto, while I agree that it ought to be on the list, saying that it might be “the most malicious book ever written” sounds more like a case of personal disagreement with its message than a sober view of the facts.
May 14th, 2008 at 11:40 am
to be honest, I was pretty sure, that Bible would end up on 1st place, but unfortunately, it didn’t happen…
May 14th, 2008 at 11:52 am
Great list overall; but, the number one book shouldn’t even be compared to the Communism Manifesto and mein kampf,these two books have destroyed hundred of millions of lives in the past century. If you’re going to put Black Box and Pivot of Civilization on the list you need to put The Origin of the Species on the list, Darwin’s work spawn these to misleading documents. Also many people have commited hate crimes with the misinterpretation of Darwin’s book. I also agree that the Bible and Quraan should be on the list but why are all these people just mentioning the bible.
May 14th, 2008 at 12:08 pm
LordCalvert have u ever read the quraan or did u just hear that from Bill O Reilly/Fox news?
May 14th, 2008 at 12:15 pm
I can’t believe no one has mentioned the Dianetics/Scientology book(s). If it weren’t this garbage Tom Cruise and John Travolta would have been done making movies long ago and for that alone L Ron’s garbage should be listed
May 14th, 2008 at 12:18 pm
Someone already said it, but don’t you people realize that the Bible is a collection of books, not a book.
May 14th, 2008 at 12:32 pm
Do a search on Snopes for “Harry Potter” and you’ll be reminded of a famous quote from PT Barnum. The article from “The Onion” to which they refer is a riot as it is, but it’s even more hilarious that people forward it as “fact.”
May 14th, 2008 at 12:41 pm
I agree, Mao Zedong’s Little Red Book brought many troubles to the societry of China, but I guess the book of communism by Karl Marx counts.
P.S. LOL!! Funny Mein Kampf Spoof
http://www.myconfinedspace.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/06/mein-kampfy-chair.jpg
May 14th, 2008 at 12:44 pm
Everybody knows that witches equal the weight of ducks, and ducks float! (Dang, Playyahplay beats me to-da-punch-bowl!)
the mere mention of ‘religion’ raises the hackles on nearly everyone who hears it… the text itself (or original intent – which we rarely ever get from the writer) may not be a problem – it’s most often the interpretation and/or practice thereof which fouls things up for humanity.
By the way… more people have been killed by other people throughout all of human history because of “beliefs” (religion as primary – not just ‘bible’) than for any other cause/reason. Don’t believe me? Look it up.
Curses…gotta get back to work!
May 14th, 2008 at 12:47 pm
i agree with most of the books mentioned… but i thinking communist manifesto and prince are wrongly labled. it’s understandable that the books in question decipt and encorage dictorial rule. however, it is necesary to look at the enviroment the books were written in, Prince for instance was wrote to unite italy so it would escape constant threats from france and other major monarchies. as for communist manifesto, it was written after marx exprienced the working conditions the laborers were forced to work and live in during the europeon industrial revolution. i think it is unreasonable to call these books evil because the writers on their part had not intended any harm, most of the works today are up for judgement. it is up to veiwer how he/she follows the book and if he/she does do an evil deed, well the author shouldn’t be blamed for, it is err on readers’ part.
May 14th, 2008 at 12:48 pm
Y’know great list and all but im disgruntled by the communist manifesto its not all that bad.. we are all equal no one better then the next… its cause of fools like stalin communism is seen as a bad thing… best part of the manifesto no religion.. religion ruins us
May 14th, 2008 at 12:50 pm
Interesting list.
I’ve only read Mein Kampf out of these (and not entirely.. kind of boring).
May 14th, 2008 at 12:51 pm
I think you are being harsh on John Dewey. In simplistic terms, he was against the old-school learn-by-rote, and propounded the development of intellectual skills. Which I, for one, have no problem with as a philosophy. Nonetheless, it does certainly seem that the quality of education has deteriorated over recent decades (a similar argument could, though, be made over preceding generations).
Similarly, Dr Spock. If you follow the links on wikipedia and read the International Journal of Epidemiology article cited, you will find some interesting points; Let me quote, for example:
The front sleeping position was recommended from 1943 to 1988 although the first text to advise against front sleeping was not published until 1992.
It wasn’t just Spock giving this advice; far from it…he was just the most well-known.
Also, those horrendous infant mortality figures appear somewhat conjectural; simple example…some infants could have died of cot-death whether or not they slept on their fronts (to use a simple example).
Ok, while I’m on a roll, I think the description of the Communist Manifesto is a little misleading.
This book has inspired some of the most brutal regimes in man’s history
It might be more accurate to say that various repressive regimes have used this book as a means of justifying/legitimising their evil social and political oppressions.
My advice to people regarding the Manifesto would be to recognise the social and historical contexts within which it was written (and, to actually read it, of course).
Finally, my nomination for a major omission from this list is Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring. Adherence to some of the acts promoted in this book are likely to have contributed to the deaths of, perhaps, millions of people.
May 14th, 2008 at 12:51 pm
Candide by Voltaire had a profound effect on the French revolution. Great book. Nice list by the way.
May 14th, 2008 at 12:53 pm
Awesome list, just find it ridiculous that people think its in order
May 14th, 2008 at 12:58 pm
though it is an essay not a book, Das Judenthum in der Musik by Richard Wagner (yes the composer) should be on this list. It was a huge inspiration to Hitler and his claim that jews were lesser people. He used, arguably the best GERMAN composer in history, essay to say “look at what this great german said, it must be true”. So i belive that should have a special spot as an essay on this list
May 14th, 2008 at 1:03 pm
Some think The Prince was satire. . .
May 14th, 2008 at 1:06 pm
zubair kaka:
You’re kidding right? Any sensible person, like Lord Calvert and I just need to look at current situations to see that the Bible and the Quran have caused bloodshed and violence all over the world.
May 14th, 2008 at 1:11 pm
Randall: So was it Dewey’s ideas themselves that led to the problem of degrading education or was the application of his ideas? Of course the American education system is in decline, but I never really thought about why. I guess what I’m asking is: was Dewey completely off-base with his theory or was it the misinterpretation of his theory that is causing the problems we see today? (Once again, I’ve never read the book, so I’m completely in the dark here.)
Elvorfin: That’s a really good point. How would you feel about it if recent genetic advancements are taken into consideration? For instance, we now know which combination of genes can provide for a potential to develop certain mental and physical disorders. If potential parents were mandated by the government to be screened for an array of these disorders, and they found that if they were to have a child, there is a greater possibilty than not of that child developing a crippling disorder, they decided not to have a child, or (hypothetically) to engineer a child to be free of this disorder, would this not have some sort of effect in the long term by filtering out the recessive genes for the disorder? Of course, we are talking in hypotheticals, because such a system would be needlessly complicated and inefficient. Disposing of the phenotype will of course not have any effect in the long term, so long as the genotype continues to be passed on. But if we could intercept the genotype on a large enough scale, could this, in theory, effectively remove the disorder from the gene pool? A larger question might be that, given that natural selection for human beings (barring a massive global environment shift) has essentially come to a standstill, could genetic mutations ever be countered to a degree that would make such eugenics even beneficial, or is human eugenics (even with the technology we have/will have) an exercise in futility?
May 14th, 2008 at 1:16 pm
kiwiboi: I think we had a previous conversation about this before. I wholeheartedly agree that Silent Spring should have been included on this list. I meant to mention that earlier but caught up in one my diatribes. That book caused a chain reaction that led to the deaths of millions upon millions of people. I would have included that before Darwin’s Black Box.
May 14th, 2008 at 1:20 pm
you forgot the bible
May 14th, 2008 at 1:24 pm
ANYTHING on SCIENTOLOGY should be on the list.
Since I don’t know any of the books, help from anyone?
May 14th, 2008 at 1:29 pm
Kiwiboi:
‘k…. so you wanna give Marx a bit of a pass and say we’re too hard on the Spock and the Dewey (little remembered sitcom in the 70s… “Spock and Dewey.” They, you know… solved crimes… while running a furniture store as cover. Something like that) but you want Rachel Carson included because you think her war against DDT was unjustified. Uh huh.
So often, we agree, Kiwi… but I remind you of the story I told you before. My family (and doctors we’ve spoken to about this) are convinced that DDT killed my father. The man was healthy and a non-smoker, and didn’t drink (well, not to excess)… but he was a pilot and a flight trainer, and among the many things he did, he was a cropduster… in the late 50s/early 60s. Breathing in DDT every time he went up to dust crops.
Somehow, inexplicably, this otherwise healthy and vigorous man (bomber pilot in WWII, sportscar enthusiast–he had a collection of ‘em–athlete, etc. etc.) contracted *pancreatic cancer,* and died within months of his 42nd birthday… thankfully after having helped to conceive yours truly.
Such things happen for a reason. And the only theories anyone ever had was, he spent years around that stuff (DDT), breathing it in, handling it, getting it all over him…
Granted, pancreatic cancer can be caused by other factors. But interestingly, the pancreas is where you’d expect the stuff to end up and collect, if it got into his system in a sufficient quantity.
I don’t want to argue with you… neither of us knows the truth really. For all I know it was just a random thing, that bad luck gene that plagues some people. But let’s not be so quick to assume that Rachel Carson was dead wrong. We at least have some scientific support for the idea that DDT was causing harm to bird populations (the thinning of eggs hatched by bald eagles was the classic example). I remain suspicious of the part it may have played in my father’s death. Maybe–MAYBE–if the stuff had been outlawed years before–he might have lived.
In the meantime, insect populations mutate and evolve defenses against insecticides… so that we’ve had to switch from one material to another. (Malathion, et al). How many truly did die, because we switched from DDT to something else?
May 14th, 2008 at 1:30 pm
From the Communist manifesto: Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with ’social’ religion”.
Is outlawing religion better than religious freedom?
May 14th, 2008 at 1:32 pm
Where’s Uncle’s Tom Cabin?
May 14th, 2008 at 1:40 pm
warningdontreadthis: examples please?
May 14th, 2008 at 1:41 pm
Amazing list! I actually have a very old copy of Mein Kamph, I’m hanging onto it for the historical value and it’s worth a good chunk of cash now. I’ve read most the book on the list and it’s amazing how things thing that were written with good intentions ( at least for the good of humanity) ended up destroying entire societies.
Of course most religious text belong here too. Regardless of what you believe, it’s probably caused death and damage at some point in history.
May 14th, 2008 at 1:57 pm
How about “The Gun Digest Book of Trap and Skeet Shooting” by Larry Sterett…it specifically shows persons with guns how to shoot at moving targets. I’m pretty sure that most of the killings in the world have been done with guns. Oh, wait…human beings worth their salt know the difference between right and wrong, and don’t need to blame a book for the evils of society. People do terrible things for their own selfish motives…not because some book told them too. A lot of these books may have given people a starting point, but the evils committed were done by evil people.
May 14th, 2008 at 2:11 pm
I don’t want to argue with you… neither of us knows the truth really.
Randall – Yes, of course, I remember you mentioning your father; it’s a tragic story, and it would be callous and ungracious – at best – for me to want to argue this one with you.
Which is why I won’t.
May 14th, 2008 at 2:13 pm
I would love to hear responces from this:
Now, Im not an ultra religious superfreak or anything, but what has the Bible PERSONALLY done to you?? Sure, people have read too much into the Bible and did some crazy things, but come on. Its not like every Christian is a mass murderer of all Jews and Communists!
May 14th, 2008 at 2:15 pm
ANYTHING on SCIENTOLOGY should be on the list.
I know where you are coming from, but Dianetics ? In the overall scheme of things it’s a relatively minor matter. Screwed up half of Hollywood, I guess, but aside from that…?
May 14th, 2008 at 2:38 pm
Christine – Thanks for pointing that out in the intro! I guess I was thrown off by the 10-to-1 countdown of the list.
May 14th, 2008 at 2:41 pm
Slickwilly:
I’ll answer those questions tomorrow. It’s late (23:40) and I still need to finish a paper about stem cells (difficult stuff).
May 14th, 2008 at 3:21 pm
Great List! As usual, haven’t heard of any of them.
May 14th, 2008 at 3:22 pm
What the hell? Jfrater, the comment count is 1 comment higher than the actual number on the list. Glitch?
May 14th, 2008 at 3:33 pm
The Bible preaches quite clearly some of the most widely accepted moral standards…
Not Killing, or Stealing.
But LOVING YOUR NEIGHBOR and even your ENEMIES (even though thats not so widely accpeted).
How about the Qur’an?
Which tells believers in Islam to KILL THE NON-BELIEVERS?
I believe that there are radicals in all religions, but considering the current state of things. Well, draw your own conclusion I suppose.
Just tossing in my two cents.
May 14th, 2008 at 3:41 pm
yes Blogball i do think outlawing religion is a good thing.. at least in politics, i am not a christian and it annoys me when i get funny looks when people find that out, i live in the United states were we are supposed to have religious freedom, the way i see it religion is a bad thing, well i should rephrase that statement. I’m fine with religion its the church i have problems with.. be it the bible or the qur’an they are mighty fine books indeed, its how people interpret them that causes problems, and especially if religious figure back them. i wont get much more into here.. this is not the time nor place for a religious argument.
May 14th, 2008 at 3:45 pm
Candice- does the Qur’an actually say that or is it more something fanatics read out of it?
May 14th, 2008 at 4:01 pm
Arkz_Archduke_of_Geeks , My point was that the Communist manifesto is mixing religion with politics by trying to abolish religion. I guess we will have to agree to disagree. Thank you giving me your take on it.
Arkz_Archduke_of_Geeks , My point was that the Communist manifesto is mixing religion with politics by trying to abolish it. I guess we will have to agree to disagree. Thank you giving me your take on it.
By the way I have many non-Christian friends and I get funny looks from them too.
Come to think of it my friends that happened to be Christians give me funny looks as well.
May 14th, 2008 at 4:04 pm
Sorry for the double statement. No wonder why everybody gives me funny looks
May 14th, 2008 at 4:23 pm
(sigh) everythings already been stated. The dumb and ingnorant have commented. The intelligent and socially aware have commented. What else is there to say. good list. message board has left me amused. Liked the part about burning more witches.
May 14th, 2008 at 5:12 pm
Id’ like to add a book called From Time Immemorial (Joan Peters, 1984), regarding Israel-Palestine. It is virtually a complete hoax, but the underlying premise is that the Palestinians are also recent immigrants to the ‘Holy Land’. The book was a best-seller in the US and received hundreds of positive reviews there. I figure any book that makes a justification – on totally fabricated grounds – for expelling an indigenous population (because they are recent immigrants) qualifies as screwing up at least that part of the world.
May 14th, 2008 at 5:38 pm
So… why is “The Bible” missing?
May 14th, 2008 at 6:02 pm
The Bible is missing because it didn’t screw up the world. There are many moral truths in the book, how can that screw people over?
May 14th, 2008 at 6:02 pm
Did you base this article from this book?
10 Books That Screwed Up the World: And 5 Others That Didn’t Help (Hardcover)
by Benjamin Wiker (Author)
From the Inside Flap
You’ve heard of the “Great Books”?
These are their evil opposites. From Machiavelli’s The Prince to Karl Marx’s The Communist Manifesto to Alfred Kinsey’s Sexual Behavior in the Human Male, these “influential” books have led to war, genocide, totalitarian oppression, family breakdown, and disastrous social experiments. And yet these authors’ bad ideas are still popular and pervasive–in fact, they might influence your own thinking without your realizing it. Here with the antidote is Professor Benjamin Wiker. In his scintillating new book, 10 Books That Screwed Up the World (And 5 Others That Didn’t Help), he seizes each of these evil books by its malignant heart and exposes it to the light of day. In this witty, learned, and provocative exposé, you’ll learn:
* Why Machiavelli’s The Prince was the inspiration for a long list of tyrannies (Stalin had it on his nightstand)
* How Descartes’ Discourse on Method “proved” God’s existence only by making Him a creation of our own ego
* How Hobbes’ Leviathan led to the belief that we have a “right” to whatever we want
* Why Marx and Engels’s Communist Manifesto could win the award for the most malicious book ever written
* How Darwin’s The Descent of Man proves he intended “survival of the fittest” to be applied to human society
* How Nietzsche’s Beyond Good and Evil issued the call for a world ruled solely by the “will to power”
* How Hitler’s Mein Kampf was a kind of “spiritualized Darwinism” that accounts for his genocidal anti-Semitism
* How the pansexual paradise described in Margaret Mead’s Coming of Age in Samoa turned out to be a creation of her own sexual confusions and aspirations
* Why Alfred Kinsey’s Sexual Behavior in the Human Male was simply autobiography masquerading as science
Witty, shocking, and instructive, 10 Books That Screwed Up the World offers a quick education on the worst ideas in human history–and how we can avoid them in the future.
May 14th, 2008 at 6:02 pm
Books don’t screw up the world. People screw up the world.
May 14th, 2008 at 6:02 pm
T.H.E. B.I.B.L.E
Number 1 book most screwed up book of all time. Caused the most wars and contains propaganda that people refuse to see.
I’m not against people who believe in the Bible but you can’t deny the destructive force those texts possess.
May 14th, 2008 at 6:09 pm
Sorry for the double post, just have to respond to CRE.
CRE: You say “The reason that books like the Bible and Koran are not on this list is because these books (and truly, the Bible is not a “book”, it is several books) were not writen with the sole intent to promote evil.” but if you notice the title and intro of the list, the list is not about evil books or intent of authors. It is about books that screwed up the world and I would say religious texts HAVE done that. The Crusades, Holy Wars, Genocides, Some terrorist attacks, these are all examples of world-changing atrocities commited in the name of Individual Gods preached through those books.
They are perfect candidates for this list.
May 14th, 2008 at 6:10 pm
astraya:Books don’t screw up the world. People screw up the world. THANK YOU
May 14th, 2008 at 6:15 pm
Astraya: But screwed up books can give screwed up people the necessary tools to screw up the world.
May 14th, 2008 at 6:28 pm
I don’t think that the last book has had as big of an impact as you think. People who believe the book of Genesis is fact will do so whether or not they read books supporting what is written. They have faith that what the Bible says is true, no matter what.
I think as honorable mention, or instead of the last book, as long as I’m suggesting what I would change, you should include Ayman al-Zawahiri’s Knights Under the Prophet’s Banner. This book outlines the beliefs and goals of Al-qaeda, which is obviously no good. It may have not caused as many deaths as some other books on the list yet, but that apparently isn’t what you based the list off of. I think it will have wide ranging effects on the world. Not only will it turn large amounts of Muslims against the West, it could also make a generation of Westerners scared of Muslims, through the acts of Al-qaeda.
May 14th, 2008 at 6:31 pm
Great list! Good job leaving off the obvious. Historically an argument can be made that most of the excesses blamed on religion were in fact for secular gain. That is power and money/land/resources.
Randall, Slick; I was in grade 4 before the great experimentation with Dewey began here in Canada. I was lucky that there were enough hold-overs from the old system – teachers and administrators – that the classics were not altogether ignored. Good teachers teach a combination of both systems. Some things are best learned by rote, some by discovery.
My kids on the other hand; Crap. They are actually taught to recognize words by drawing shapes made of little boxes. On end rectangular box for h, k, l, tall letters, square boxes for e, a, o, short letters. I had a fit! What is wrong with letters having sounds that link up into words. And math, actually encouraged to guess. What the hell is with close enough? Another fit. My eldest, the brainwave, never had any Shakespeare. Except in grade 11 French. Nevermind. I will say that his high school math was ahead of ours. He was taking Discrete Mathematics (something I don’t understand, statiticians use it) in high school, not available until University when I was a student. Even that was because of the teacher at that particular school, none of the other high schools in the county offered it. Not because of policy.
It makes being a parent harder, I don’t get paid mega-bucks for remediation. (I do it anyway)
May 14th, 2008 at 6:40 pm
While not as significant as the ones on this list, I think The Catcher in the Rye has screwed up many people, including Mark David Chapman who was influenced by the book in his murder of John Lennon.
May 14th, 2008 at 6:50 pm
DIANETICS! DIA-FUCKING-NETICS! it gave us scientology damnit!
or the Bible, either one
May 14th, 2008 at 7:01 pm
Its down each individual perception and intrepretation of the said books, Holy or otherwise. Holy Books are sort of Forests of Knowledge, you go in search for what you need and you get it. Search for a sword and you will find it, search to help or heal others or yourself , you will find it. i apologise if this has already been said.
I agree with astraya. We screw the world and ourselves over all the time.
Have a lovely day ahead.
May 14th, 2008 at 7:21 pm
Fark the bible………
id rather read mein kampf to see what hitler ACTUALLY carried out……
books on peoples theories are useless unless its been done
if a simple book can affect a humans mind to go and commit atrocities, then they have the brain of a monkey…..
although, ive read the heroin diaries and it makes me want to be a rockstar!
May 14th, 2008 at 7:29 pm
To all those ‘geniuses’ pointing out for the umpteenth time that the Bible or the Quran is missing on this list, please read what Jamie put on the intro to the list:
“I have intentionally left off some of the more obvious choices – as they will almost certainly come up in the comments.”
In other words, HE KNOWS. He knew you would ramble on and on about the Bible and the Quran long before he posted this list. That’s why he decided to not be as obvious and predictable as his lists’ commenters, and instead provide new insights on some OTHER reasons why the world is screwed up. For that we should all be thankful.
Pardon the interruption. You may now continue your otiose and numbingly tedious religious comment war.
May 14th, 2008 at 7:36 pm
Kreachure – Agreed, the comments are always full of geniuses pointing out the obvious
religion this, quaran that…….get a life…….
if the bible is responsible for killing YOU – then take it up with god when you meet him…….
ill be sure to say gday to satan for you all
May 14th, 2008 at 7:59 pm
I do not get why Darwin’s Black Box is on the first list. I understand why it’s there by stating that creationlism is how the world was made and it rejects evolution, however, isn’t evolution just a theory like creationlism?
May 14th, 2008 at 8:23 pm
What about the Anarchist Cookbook? I guess there’s a reason that it’s illegal…
May 14th, 2008 at 9:07 pm
how about “Satanic Verses” by Salman Rushdie, it insighted hate and Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini put out a fatwa for Rushdie to be killed.
May 14th, 2008 at 9:09 pm
Theres no such thing as religion versus science. Theres religion versus atheism. Theres nothing more ignorant than saying religion attacks science or vice versa. Nowhere in the bible, koran, whatever does it say “FORSAKE ALL SCIENCE AND LIVE IN A HUT TECHNOLOGY IS EVIL BURN SOME WITCHES”.
May 14th, 2008 at 9:10 pm
110. Alejandro
Actually plagarised in places.
Check out the background of the author and you’ll see there’s a bit of agenda behind the list.
May 14th, 2008 at 9:16 pm
RE The influence of Dewey on Education, James, I’m with your brother.
You do New Zealand a huge disservice in your grossly sentimentalized assessment of the education system. Perhaps you are out of touch or too blinded with a Classicist education to see how the world must move on!
____________________________________________________________
“Nicowarrior: the problem is rejecting fact based education – some things are objectively true and to deny that is seriously wrong. The results in New Zealand from 10 years of this type of education system (where there are no tests because everyone passes) has given rise to a generation of uneducated people. Even reading abilities are dropping massively.”
______________________________________________________
The FACTS are these: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/topic/story.cfm?c_id=329&objectid=10482412
http://stats.oecd.org/wbos/viewhtml.aspx?queryname=475&querytype=view&lang=en
From the OECD PISA 2006 Study across 57 countries and 20 million students:
* science third equal.
* reading we’re fourth equal (much the same as in PISA 2000)
* maths sixth equal.
Of course this buys into the anti Dewey notion that tests and scores are the best determinate of success in an education system.
Surely the best indicator is what people DO with that education. New Zealand is well represented in all endeavours of knowledge and ability application. We hit way above our weight as a very small out-of-the-way nation in sports, business, science and the arts. We have one of the lowest unemployment rates in the world in spite of exporting our talented workers and losing thousands of jobs a year to exporting our manufacturing facilities overseas. Even Oxford University England is run by a New Zealander (who struggles to drag it out of debt and into the 21C). Many other countries including the USA use our text books to teach reading. Our methodology was recently voted best by a visiting country’s teachers.
Because we can do educating the masses on our head, we a developed enough country to wonder what we can do for those who can not/will not pass tests. We have many for whom English is a second language. We have many Polynesian and Maori who need different teaching. One in 5 kids are supposedly attention deficient! The measure of a country is how it caters for everyone (democracy).
May 14th, 2008 at 9:25 pm
science and atheism doesn’t really pay attention to religion any way fo the reaon that is fairytales and fiction. sometimes us athiests (vainly) try and help religious people see that beleiving in something that doesn’t exist is silly.
“isn’t evolution just a theory like creationlism?” FYI creationism isn’t a theory it’s a story. But really think about it people. say for example creationsim and evolution was placed on trial to evidence used to prove/disprove either one, which would win. “OTHER reasons why the world is screwed up.” unfortunately religion has done the most damage.
May 14th, 2008 at 9:37 pm
Oh, people. The list ain’t budging: he’s not including The Bible, the Koran, OR any scientology books. Just stop, it’s entirely too silly. And now for something completely different: (not really though)
I agree with Jamie keeping the above-mentioned off the list. The Bible does not cause people to do evil things, it’s the belief that it is the word of God that makes them do wrong (or right, you know, depending on your perspective). People read Mein Kampf and said, after some time and political upheaval later, “Oh, you know, maybe he is right”, not, “Hey! God wrote this and that’s what the Big Guy in the Sky wants, so, yeah…tithe my fields and sell my sister for donkeys”. Besides the fact that, while the Bible, the Koran, and …ugh, dare I say it, I already feel filthy…scientology books are filled with evil, they also give people faith, which in turn makes them happy.
Ew, I just supported Scientology. Can someone give me my thetans back?
May 14th, 2008 at 9:40 pm
129. Rusty
Well said
May 14th, 2008 at 9:53 pm
Admitting that many atrocities committed in the supposed spirit of communism are horrid and unconscionable, I still can’t agree with the argument that you levy against it. I do believe that it is a very flawed system and that the unilateral abolition of personal wealth will only tip the scale more greatly. But aside from the confiscation of an immigrant’s property over that of national citizens, I don’t see how any of your criticisms couldn’t be redirected as a potential positive. Private ownership of land, especially related to the contemporaneous legislation for enclosures in parliament, was an issue which caused great strife for the working class and literally split them into squabbling gangs. The perpetuation of inheritance is what kept aristocratic control from ever succumbing to the consequences of personal agency (or lack thereof). And as for heavy taxes, it is precisely when a populous recognizes itself as a group worth supporting that it earns its place as such. That being said, I don’t support communism or its tenets and only ask for a more rigorous argument against it from an author I’ve come to respect. That’d be you. Keep on fighting and, please, for the sake of basic rigor, build your opponents out of bricks not straw.
May 14th, 2008 at 10:22 pm
trojan_man:
Israel.
The situation with the Danish drawings.
Almost any war we’ve had, has had a bace in religion.
May 14th, 2008 at 10:36 pm
fart breath:
No it isn’t ID (intelligent design) is considered as a failed attempt by creationists to make a theory that is equal to the theory of evolution.
The theory of evolution is the most complete and reasonable explanation we have.
And besides, creationist don’t claim that ID is a theory they state that it is the only way the world could have been made, making it not valid as a scientific theory. Because though the theory of evolution has been worked at it is only a theory that could be proven wrong, but that’s most unlikely because scientists constantly find proof to back it up. They don’t claim to have all the answers only religion does.
Kris: I don’t know if the Quran does but I read that the Bible does so I have no doubt the Quran does too.
May 14th, 2008 at 10:51 pm
Davo- Congratulations…you’re an ass. The only reason we have any form of society (or humanity, for that matter) is because of religion.
With that said, can a poorly written book about evolution really be the most detrimental book EVER? Does that suggest that the acceptance of evolution is is the most substantial issue in the world? I would have probably moved it from #1 down to…off the list in the first place. Thats like putting Dave Chappelle at the top of the Most Evil People list because his show led to the creation of Mind of Mencia. To some…bad. To others, really bad. In the end, does it really matter to anyone?
jfrater-Great list…until #1
May 14th, 2008 at 11:46 pm
Ok hold up…..
2 concerns
first, why isint “The anarchist cookbook” ever mentioned, it has been cited in numerous school shootings in American Highschools. Along with having ties to the O.C. Bombings.
second, was whoever wrote this list aware of a popular publication called “the bible”….nothing in history has screwed up societies more than religious differences..
May 14th, 2008 at 11:49 pm
the bible > religious differences have a history of causing problems…….
the anarchist cookbook > school shootings
May 14th, 2008 at 11:49 pm
interesting list, they have been getting a little dry lately so I’m happy to see this one.
I do enjoy the controversy brought up in the comments, people bringing up the bible, some one saying the quran tells it’s followers to kills infidels (which is an unbelievably uninformed comment brought on by recent issues).
In my opinion I don’t think democracy and education should have made it on. It isn’t really a true statement to say anymore that there are solid facts. The same school of thought said that the world was flat once. We say it’s round now, I think to say that might change as we come to understand more in the world and more about metaphysics and the state of nature, that may change as well, I’m not terrible informed on the issue to be honest but that came to mind, I’ll admit that I too might be wrong about the topic. I was happy to see the first book. I think that it is a serious threat to undermine science in the name of any religion. Belief structures have had many benefits in the past but they no longer in our contemporary society hold much ground and only serve as retroactive and anti-productive activity. I have a feeling that dianetics is not on the list because you did not want to deal with the possible politics that would arise out of the situation, I’ve heard many times that that particular community is not very friendly with any commentary about their society (which only makes the book more belonging on the list).
May 14th, 2008 at 11:52 pm
the bible > religious differences have never produced a good situation
the anarchist cookbook > O.K. City bombings, numerous school shootings, curruption of youth.
come on
May 14th, 2008 at 11:57 pm
Jay – read the intro – I even put it in bold for those who would eventually complain without reading
May 15th, 2008 at 12:00 am
The Da Vinci Code.
Saying that Christ was just a special person, and not the son of God. Anti-Christianity.
May 15th, 2008 at 12:13 am
Alejandro (#110): I didn’t base it on the book – which I have not read – but I did use some of the single line blurbs from the editorial bit you posted.
Matt (#128): are you saying I have plagiarised this list and have an agenda or are you saying the author of the book mentioned by Alejandro has an agenda? I certainly don’t, I can assure you.
May 15th, 2008 at 12:30 am
I don’t really agree with #5. America’s education system isn’t weak because it isn’t based on facts and data. In fact, the entire system is based on facts and data, hence standardized testing, which in turn reduces the necessity for students to actually try to think for themselves. Most public schools are teaching facts, and very few are teaching otherwise. That doesn’t mean that all the facts are true though, but with the facts changing all the time it’s really hard for every teacher to keep up with it. The introduction of creationism in school science classes is not a widespread thing, nor is a lot of other attempts to misrepresent the truth through means that are not based in fact.
,
I think, if anything, the author was right that our education system doesn’t work. Teaching them about the data and not encouraging them to have “thinking skills” has resulted in an entire generation that calls tech support instead of fixing things on their own.
But that’s my take on it, seeing how I’m a part of that youth culture…we have an entire nation filled with people that don’t think anymore. Just look at the last two elections
May 15th, 2008 at 12:36 am
Whenever I read a list like this, out of nowhere and Very well researched, I think to myself. How the Hell do you think of these lists?
The best I can do when it comes to some sort of off-the-wall-why-didn’t-I-think-of-that-and-what-other-social-ramifications-are-there-to-this-subject-Eureka moment is when I’m standing there staring at the picture above my toilet! You never cease to amaze.
Seriously how do you think of these things!?
May 15th, 2008 at 12:53 am
Rusty: from the article you linked: ” In science we came seventh, in reading fifth and mathematics 11th out of 57 countries” 5th place, 7th place, and 11th is not exactly brilliant
What is most interesting is that the country that comes out on top (Finland) has a very different educational system to New Zealand (which was beaten by 6, 4, and 10 other countries). In Finland children don’t start school until they are 7. In the first nine years of school they get “Basic School”.
The article also says: “The Ministry refused to supply a list of what schools participated in the Pisa. Nor could it tell us how many schools that offer Cambridge examinations as well as NCEA were in the survey.” That doesn’t give me much hope in the quality of the scores to show how the new system is working (NCEA).
Having said that – thanks for giving the links – they were certainly an interesting read (though the numbers on the OECD site are extremely poorly presented!)
May 15th, 2008 at 1:00 am
Put the bible and the koran in shared first place and you will have a true list! Or maybe the bible first, because this book has had the longest and worst influence on the world.
May 15th, 2008 at 1:11 am
Wow… Reading through the comments, i’m sure i counted upwards of 30 people demanding the Quran or bible get placed on the list. Even after the disclaimer at the top, and numerous posts throughout calling for it to stop. Really, don’t people read the comments before they post?
For the record, I Believe in God, but not religion. Religion is essentially a man made ideal, and thus, is imperfect.
May 15th, 2008 at 1:29 am
mklong – the Anarchists’ Cookbook ? You are, in my view, totally mistaken to imply that it could have any meaningful influence on the crimes you mention (let alone “screw up the world”).
Does it not strike you that somebody who has the mindset to commit these atrocities might be likely to own a copy due to his very nature/personality? Not to mention any normal, curious, 16 year old boy; anybody with an internet connection can download themselves a free copy. I used to have a copy myself…but that didn’t make me an actual or potential terrorist.
Anyhow…that book is so lame (as is the easily available downloadable version).
May 15th, 2008 at 1:48 am
jfrater – actually, I found the educational study quite compelling. And consensus as to the success determinant seems to be the quality of the teachers as opposed to the system.
Methinks you might be a diehard traditionalist
May 15th, 2008 at 2:01 am
@buclism: the answer is, of course: “More witches.”
@BishopWhiteT: “Bread! Apples! Very small rocks!…Churches!”
@Bob: were not Monty Python lessons included in your school curricilum? or you skipped the classes where they taught them…
May 15th, 2008 at 2:40 am
kiwiboi: methinks you might be right
I even did a top 10 list on how to give yourself a classical education!
May 15th, 2008 at 2:48 am
even before i read the list, i have to say absolutely brilliant title. now that’s the kind of thing that makes you want to read the list even if your boss is standing behind you
May 15th, 2008 at 3:04 am
I don’t think either the Bible nor the Quran had anything to do with “screwing”. I believe the people who wrote both did not mean to screw the world. The people who read it screwed themselves and religious difference could very well be their fault anyways.
May 15th, 2008 at 4:36 am
SlickWilly: A try to answer some questions
First off, I know that there in Belgium a hospital where parents that are both bearers of the disease could let embryo’s from IVF screen for genetic disorders like cystic fibrosis. So on a small scale for parents with a high risk it is certainly possible. But a doubt it is a good method for filtering out those bad genes. This is because there are always new mutations that will happen, a normal mutation frequency is 1 in a million genes. There will be always people with the disease. In my opinion, a better solution is to find a good treatment based on gene therapy or stem cell therapy that counter effects the symptoms of the disease, so that we can help people with disorders coming forth of new mutations. Another method is to mix races a human population. Lots of genetic disorders come forth from inbreeding. The mutation frequency stays of course the same but in isolated communities the chance is much bigger that two recessive genes come together in a child. Therefore mixing of populations will not change the amount of mutated alleles but there will be less homozygotic genes and therefore the number of disorders will decline. It is always better to have a heterozygotic population, I think. There will be less recessive diseases and a greater number of individuals will be adapted to a changed environment (like a new virus or so). Therefore I think that human eugenics is not only almost impossible but maybe also counter effective.
P.S. I hope this makes any sense, my native language is dutch and I had a hard time finding the right English words.
May 15th, 2008 at 5:05 am
You forgot to list “Under the Bleachers” by Seymour Butts.
I can’t think of a more malicious book, people have killed, maimed, tortured, pillaged, wedgied, sucker punched, pointed to a stain on your shirt and when you look they jam their finger in your face, licked their finger and put it in peoples ears, and squirted water in the face of Tom Cruise during an interview, all in the name of Mr. Butts’ book.
May 15th, 2008 at 5:16 am
Kiwiboi:
Thanks pal. I know you think I’m wrong. But that’s okay. I appreciate your gentlemanly manner in handling my argument, such as it was.
May 15th, 2008 at 5:21 am
bucslim… the site’s resident expert on all humor adolescent and/or scatological in nature.
May 15th, 2008 at 5:32 am
Jfrater: Are not going to answear the question?
I should think you have a good reason for not putting the Bible (or the Quran here).
May 15th, 2008 at 5:34 am
Wow, this is a really interesting list! To be honest, for a while I haven’t been interested in the lists as much, but I really liked this one!
May 15th, 2008 at 5:35 am
you forgot to include the bible
May 15th, 2008 at 5:41 am
warningdontreadthis: see my closing paragraph at the top of the list – I said I was intentionally leaving some books off because I knew that people would raise them in the comments – the Bible was one of those books
And you all didn’t disappoint.
May 15th, 2008 at 5:48 am
Stop notifying me of followup comments
May 15th, 2008 at 5:48 am
Thanks pal. I know you think I’m wrong.
Randall – think nothing of it.
But it wasn’t easy…this is soooo me :
http://www.excel.me.uk/cartoon.html
May 15th, 2008 at 5:52 am
warningdontreadthis: you say the Bible, Quran, and other religious books have CAUSED bloodshed and violence all over the world, therefore:
Gun manufacturers have caused all of the gun deaths;
Knife manufacturers have caused all of the knifing deaths;
Car manufacturers have caused all of the vehicle accident deaths;
Alcohol manufacturers have caused all of the DUI manslaughter deaths;
Cow farmers caused all the the obesity issues;
Sugar producers caused all of the dental problems.
The books do not screw up the world, the humans screw up the world.
May 15th, 2008 at 5:54 am
jfrater: maybe “10 Books that People can use as an Excuse to Screw up the World” would have been a better title. Then you could have included religous texts and the whiners would be happy.
May 15th, 2008 at 6:19 am
Kiwiboi:
HA HA. Me too, man. That’s me too.
May 15th, 2008 at 6:36 am
HA HA. Me too, man. That’s me too
LOL…ain’t it a killer being like that
May 15th, 2008 at 6:41 am
None of Scientologist’s text? Really?
May 15th, 2008 at 6:51 am
I just do not understand some people’s obsession with typing out the phrase:
“You forgot to include the Bible”
I haven’t gone back to count it out, but it’s as if the person gets a cookie every time they repeat that sentence. I think it’s been established that – whether you agree with it or not – that Jamie didn’t include the Bible. He sort of said that in the introductory comments. Screw that, I’m going to make sure that everyone who read this thinks I’m a smarty pants know it all by repeating it over and over again that the Bible is evil and I’m saving the human race despite it being mentioned 500 times here and on other lists.
Is your computer equipped with some sort of pleasure device that delivers you a dose of heroin every time you repeat something some other jagov has pointed out ad nauseum?
Will you people please leave and go back to your coloring books or Bob the Builder cartoons or at least make your moronic notations at some place like e-baums?
May 15th, 2008 at 6:53 am
trojan_man:
I have never said that humans aren’t at fault!
So in that way we dont disagree cause humans wrote the Bible.
The Bible screwed us up in the same ways these books have, if not more.
Sorry Jfrater I must have missed that
May 15th, 2008 at 7:04 am
Wow bucslim. I don’t tihnk by them saying the Bible makes them ebaums fodder. I do wish someone would back it up with why they feel the Bible screwed up the world and not just keep saying the Bible. It is funny that when it comes to those that we don’t agree with we start name calling. I keep seeing people get very offended by people who say the Bible and defend it by saying it is full of good things. There are some other things that can be interpreted to mean some not so good things. And when certain people have gotten a hold of it some not so good things have happened. But there is the thing, it is about the person and what they do with the knowledge.
May 15th, 2008 at 7:16 am
I used to be a big fan of Hitler’s work. Now you’re telling me that he called his second book; Second Book? Bah, I wash my hands of him!
May 15th, 2008 at 7:19 am
warningdontreadthis: I don’t want to offend anyone, but Christians believe that the Bible was ispired by God. So, yes, it was written by humans, but not inpired by humans. I don’t think Adolph Hitler would have said the same thing.
By the way, you gave the examples of the Bible causing bloodshed by saying: Israel and The Danish Drawings. I guess you are talking about Israel vs. Palestine and the Mohammed cartoons? If that is the case, do you think that these “fights” would still be going on if there had been no Bible or Quran? What if they were just spoken stories passed down for generations? My point: people use these books on the list (and others) as an excuse to commit heinous acts. The book itself does not cause the act. If it were that easy, you and I could co-author a book that tells everyone in the world to send us a $1 bill (or its’ equivalent) and we would end up with $6 billion.
May 15th, 2008 at 7:20 am
Since there’s Bible slagging and Koran slagging, how about that wacky ol’ Book of Mormon? I’ve seen plenty of lives screwed up by that one.
Brian: Please, please, please listen! I’ve got one or two things to say.
Crowd: Tell us! Tell us both of them!
Brian: Look, you’ve got it all wrong! You don’t NEED to follow ME, You don’t NEED to follow ANYBODY! You’ve got to think for your selves! You’re ALL individuals!
The Crowd: Yes! We’re all individuals!
–
I asked my high school English teacher to autograph my “Life of Brian” script. He wrote: “To QDV…you are an intelligent reader. Now, you just have to find something intelligent to read.”
May 15th, 2008 at 7:22 am
sorry, inspired should have been the word…both times
May 15th, 2008 at 8:41 am
JwJwBean – just tired of the brain-dead one trick rubberneckers showing up, scratching their ass, picking their nose and proceeding to repeat the same tired horse potato lines. They can’t be funny or original, so they barf up something someone already wrote 10 times.
I don’t give a shit if you’re Anton LaVey and you want to burn Christians at the stake, at the very least write something that makes me laugh or moves the conversation along.
I get so angry it makes me want to take my family on a vacation to South Dakota.
May 15th, 2008 at 8:42 am
I strongly disagree with the communist manifest thing. This manifest has inspired thousand of organizations to fight for the rights of the workers all over the world. The ideas have been corrupted and exploited by way too powerful men, but i still think the manifest was needed to start a left wing movement in the world.
I also find inspiration in many of the books by Stalin, Lenin and Mao, even tho they did horrible things that i don’t support at all.
May 15th, 2008 at 8:55 am
In reply to:
“ChrisM: let us not forget that the rejection of evolution as a possibility based solely on a fundamentalist interpretation of the Bible has lead many people to try to have discussion of it removed from school curricula – it is pretty bad when any group tries to suppress open debate.”
I honestly don’t see why either side cares so deeply about trivial facts such as how old the earth is. If someone wants to believe that Evolution is bullocks why does it matter?
If it angers people from both sides and neither wants the others point of view discussed in public schools than get rid of the discussion all together.
There are more than enough subjects and discussions that actually will apply to a persons day to day life than that of the theories of creation anyways.
May 15th, 2008 at 9:05 am
trojan_man:
I don’t quite understand you. I mean what are you saying that differs from me?
We’re both saying that humans are at fault. You say that they use these books (and the bible) as an excuse for violence and bloodshed. And I agree that they do.
And as an atheist I don’t believe that the Bible is the word of God. Correct me if I am wrong but the gospels were written a long time after Jesus lived. But as we have the Bible, people are able to constantly bring up stories from it and claim that it is the word of God and because some really evil people got their hands on it and forced others to believe in it, we haven’t managed to get rid of it. Even though it’s a book full of contradictions:
it says don’t kill but I believe I read somewhere on listverse that it encourages parents to kill their disobedient children.
We would have thought just as little of people believing in Jesus and Marie as we do people who believe in Aphrodite and Zeus if the bible didn’t exist and the stories of their lives where just that.
So are we actually disagreeing or articulating our opinion that is basically the same thing in different ways?
QDV: I agree I did a presentation about Mormonism and they are pretty fucked up as well.
Magic underwear much?
May 15th, 2008 at 9:10 am
bucslim:I don’t know if that comment was directed at people like me. But not all of us have the gift of comedy like you do
May 15th, 2008 at 9:25 am
warningdontreadthis: Yes, we do agree that these books and others have given some radicals a jumping-off point. However, we disagree that the Bible and other religious books are the cause of most of the bloodshed going on. My main point is that a lot of people in this world blame books, speeches, tv shows, music, ect. on the evils of the world instead of taking responsibility for their actions. The true measure of a human is not whether or not he/she makes a mistake (everyone does); it’s whether they learn from the mistake and don’t make it again. My father taught a course in college about Civil War Preaching. He wrote his own textbook (with a small amount of research help from me) and showed how some pastors justified slavery as biblically correct. That is not my view and I don’t remember reading any such passage. However, this does not mean that the bible is responsible for slavery or civil rights violations in the 20th century. It means some people read (or listen) to others without thinking for themselves. That is ignorance.
Also, I think the bible (and other religious texts) has been a basis for countless acts of kindness. Wouldn’t you agree? Not many of these other books can say that.
May 15th, 2008 at 9:27 am
warningdontreadthis- certainly not. It’s the troglodytic single shot morons who are the listverse’s answer to Rain Man.
Definitely, definitely the Bible, definitely definitely.
May 15th, 2008 at 9:32 am
Chris M; “discussed in public schools than get rid of the discussion all together.” What? not teach the origins of our planet? not teach science? not teach natural history? because some yahoos don’t agree?
I sincerely hope you never run for school trustee. And if you do, you better not win. I can’t believe you said that.
May 15th, 2008 at 9:36 am
warningdontreadthis
If you and lord calvert have common sense i fear for mankind…
do the math man, the last century how many people were killed by communism and holocaust? you cant even compare the amounts killed in the named of establishment of secular states.
Or is world war II something you’ve never heard of? do they not show it on Fox news?
May 15th, 2008 at 9:42 am
august grey…you are a legend!
May 15th, 2008 at 9:46 am
ChrisM:
Sorry, but this little thing you posted was one of the dumbest things I’ve read all day.
To begin with, the age of the Earth is NOT a “trivial fact.” Scientific questions about the origin of the Earth and life on the Earth (including us) are basic to what we are. If all you’re concerned about is your day-to-day life, Chris, then turn in your human brain at the soonest opportunity so someone else can use it. Our ancestors spent a shitload of time evolving the damn things, and not just so you can go and waste yours by limiting its power to questions of whether to have fish or chicken for dinner, and what’s on “Top Gear” tonight.
This attitude (of yours) appalls me. It’s the same attitude that asks “why do we bother with exploring space? What does it mean to me and my day-to-day life?” Well why not stop ALL questioning and exploration then? Why not just stop science altogether and go back to living in ignorance? Don’t you think for a MOMENT that maybe you’ve benefited from people asking and arguing about these big questions—no matter what they are? You may not see the benefit directly on your puny little mortal life, but it’s there.
Don’t you ever have thoughts and questions beyond the day-to-day, Chris? Haven’t you ever *wondered* anything? Don’t you CARE about anything beyond what you can touch and consume?
Our lives here on this globe mean more than just being born, existing, dying, and returning to the biomass. If the big questions bother you so much, then I’m quite sure you’d be happier as a snail or a sponge. If I were you, I’d hope for reincarnation and then ask to be reassigned to the lower orders. You’ll be happier.
May 15th, 2008 at 9:48 am
Randall: ouch!
May 15th, 2008 at 9:50 am
Owned!
May 15th, 2008 at 10:34 am
Sheit, son.
May 15th, 2008 at 10:38 am
I knew the communist manifesto would be on here and rated high up. technically, its lead to the death of millions.
May 15th, 2008 at 10:39 am
Slick – having a “Senator Clay Davis” moment?
May 15th, 2008 at 10:48 am
This is why I love Randall- so long as he’s not calling me a sponge.
May 15th, 2008 at 10:50 am
Buc: If I’d held it out a little longer, yes.
May 15th, 2008 at 10:53 am
I have never said that communism or anti-Semitism is better than religion. But as Jfrater has written the books that inspired the holocaust and communim on the list I didn’t feel it was necessary to bring that up.
Besides anti- Semitism first came from religion, after all did the Christians not blame the Jews for Jesus dying?
First of all I don’t live in America so I have never seen Fox News.
Secondly yes I’ve heard about the Second World War, I’ve been obsessed with the subject since I first learnt about at school.
May 15th, 2008 at 11:04 am
I think you misprinted the title of #10, Jamie: it clearly reads “Mallevs Maleficarvm”. I mean, come on…duh! ;P
May 15th, 2008 at 11:08 am
I didn’t know that Jamie wrote the books that inspired the holocaust and communism. All this time, I thought he was a harmless ex-opera-singing internet overlord.
May 15th, 2008 at 11:29 am
Personally I wouldn’t care about people believing in the shit written in the Bible if I hadn’t found out that schools in the US are considering teaching intelligent design. What the hell?
Why would they even consider that?
I wish I had a memory like Rainman, I’m the most forgetful person there is!
May 15th, 2008 at 11:31 am
SlickWilly:
Really? then you have been wrong. Jamie is evil.
Accept it!
May 15th, 2008 at 11:37 am
Randall; Now no dissing of Top Gear. Pick on Pinks instead!
May 15th, 2008 at 11:38 am
edit to post #90 above:
sheit, son.
May 15th, 2008 at 11:39 am
thats freedom baby!
what do you care what we do in the USA? Huh?
May 15th, 2008 at 11:39 am
edit to post #201:
“edit to post #190 above”
Yeah, that’s the ticket.
May 15th, 2008 at 11:43 am
Slick-
don’t make me spank you! cool it w/ the multiple letters. it messes w/ the comment flow. ’sides it just does not look pretty.
May 15th, 2008 at 11:44 am
Yeah.
I’ve learned my lesson.
May 15th, 2008 at 11:44 am
the commandment “thou shall not kill” was written in aramaic and it translates to thou shall not murder
big difference
May 15th, 2008 at 11:45 am
warningdontreadthis: I believe they are considering teaching it because about 75% of the US believes in some sort of itelligent design.
May 15th, 2008 at 11:46 am
spank or bitch slap………j/k
May 15th, 2008 at 11:47 am
Cyn, will you spank me after you’re done with Slick?
May 15th, 2008 at 11:48 am
Trojan_man:
i am from the USA and i would tend to believe that 75% is an awful lot
whats your source?
May 15th, 2008 at 11:49 am
buc-
sure. we can discuss rates later.
May 15th, 2008 at 11:50 am
do you guys want to be takin’ out back to the woodshed for a godd ol’ fashioned ass whoopin’
May 15th, 2008 at 11:51 am
212: Good not godd
May 15th, 2008 at 11:52 am
Ok I shall have my quick say about education in NZ, I feel semi qualified to as I have a son who is in his last year of schooling, and three preschoolers, two who start school in January.
The education has failed dismally here and I am appalled at the lack of general knowledge as well as maths, English and science.
But there has been a huge change around since the oldest boy has been at school and seeing what is being achieved with the small children now gives me hope that it is the right thing.
The younger children are learning sounds of letters at preschool. I visited the catholic primary where two of my children will start next year, and the children who had been at school for only two to three weeks, were already doing simple maths sums, like minus and plus.
That in itself gives me hope for our education system now. Its very sad for the ones the older lads age who have missed out on a bit.
oh and great list
May 15th, 2008 at 11:58 am
MPW: several websites will give the religious stats for the US. It is accepted that between 70% and 75% of the US claims to be Christian of some sort. Then another 2% to 3% are Jewish, Muslim, etc. and about 15% to 20% are atheist or agnostic. Therefore, my theory is that 80% of the persons in the US claim some sort of personal religion. It can be inferred that religions normally believe in a higher power of some sort. This would mean that most of those religious persons believe that the origin of the earth had some intelligent design or at least some help (some religious people believe God created evolution). I threw in a 10% error factor and said “about” to get it to a round number. However, if only 50% of Americans believe in the theory of intelligent design, doesn’t that make it relevant to discussion?
http://www.teachingaboutreligion.org/Demographics/map_demographics.htm
May 15th, 2008 at 11:59 am
I just read some of chrisM’s posts… WOW!
get off our planet
May 15th, 2008 at 12:03 pm
trojan: thanks, you are right
i should have known that sometimes i kinda retarded
May 15th, 2008 at 12:06 pm
i just proved my point
“i kinda retarded”
i am kind retarded
May 15th, 2008 at 12:13 pm
AH HA! “otiose” – idle, functionless, futile… way cool! I just learned another .37 cent word for the day… can I go home now?
By the way… the only really ‘intelligent design’ was toilet paper – I hated using the old Sears-n-Roebuck pages when I was a kid!!!
May 15th, 2008 at 12:21 pm
Jfrater: My first listverse “fight.” I enjoyed it, didn’t you:D?
Oh and whats all this talk about spanking?
May 15th, 2008 at 12:35 pm
MPW: My only concern with teaching is when do you start giving information, to children or teenagers, that they have to formulate some opinion about? If you tell a 3rd grader that God made the world, they will probably believe it. But they also believe that a fat man brings them presents in December. When is the appropriate time to give them the info on intelligent design and evolution and let them conclude for themselves?
May 15th, 2008 at 12:36 pm
after all did the Christians not blame the Jews for Jesus dying?
Yes…though technically it was the Romans that did it. A bit harsh, too…after all, strictly speaking, he was only dead for 3 days
May 15th, 2008 at 12:42 pm
Cyn: Awww, come on. It doesn’t have the same effect when you shorten it to just 5 letters. It doesn’t make any phonetic sense that way. Spoil sport.
May 15th, 2008 at 12:47 pm
JayArr: For some reason, that reminds me of an old episode of Seinfeld, where George goes off on why toilet paper technology hasn’t changed a bit over the years. He gets real proud of himself as if he has finally uncovered some lost wisdom, only to be crushed as Jerry reminds him of two-ply and a general increase in softness and absorption capacity. Classic…
Back to our regularly scheduled program.
May 15th, 2008 at 12:51 pm
JayArr, Slick: funny stuff…it leads me to another good list idea – top 10 or 20 best inventions of the 20th century. Computers, internet, air conditioning, cruise control (unfortunately not Tom Cruise), and (my favorite) the spork, etc.
May 15th, 2008 at 12:58 pm
Funny story about a spork (that is true):
The ninth and tenth grade history classes went on a field trip to a Renaissance fair. One ninth grader in particular was known as the class clown, and thought it would be highly amusing to buy a spork (this spork was a blacksmithed contraption consisting of a spoon on one end and a fork on the other). When he proudly displayed the spork for all to see, the tenth graders told him his $20 spork was being given away at a different part of the fair. Needless to say, he flipped out and started swearing until someone clued him in to the shennanigans.
May 15th, 2008 at 1:05 pm
kiwiboi:
Well said xD
May 15th, 2008 at 1:13 pm
i learned about mein kampf in english when we were learning about the holocaust. its weird that hitler calls the book my struggle. what about the jews struggle?
May 15th, 2008 at 1:35 pm
Whoever wrote the blurb on Mike Behe’s book has not read it. It nowhere gives support to the Bible. It is not against evolution. It has not been “refuted by science”. Be sure you don’t read it or it may disturb you.
May 15th, 2008 at 1:57 pm
Trojan man;
By your logic if 50% of a population believes that aids is caused by evil spirits it would merit discussion and debate. Because 1/2 the people are ignorant does not give us the go-ahead to perpetuate said ignorance.
Evil spirits and Intelligent Design are equally baseless.
May 15th, 2008 at 2:02 pm
Mom424:
!
May 15th, 2008 at 2:04 pm
I don’t like the book I referenced (post 110), I was just intrigued, specially because of the line accompanying the Communist Manifesto: “it could win the award for the most malicious book ever written”.
I think the Bible should be number one, with the Koran being number two and other religious books being dis”honorable mentions”. Not only because of the issue of misinterpretation. If you know the history of the Bible, you will know that it has been tampered with, mistranslated and put to different interpretations according to the times. There is no such thing as biblical divine inspiration.
Indeed, there are some good moral advices in those books, but there are too good moral advices in Batman or Archie comics.
To the guys arguing for the great thing that religion is:
The only reason there exists something of a Western civilization is because there’s separation of Church and State in most countries or because the influence of the Church (specially the Catholic Church) has been greatly reduced. Most people have no problem with people having faith, but when religion tries to introduce itself in every aspect of life (from political to private life) you get homophobia, racism, genocide, slavery, etc.
May 15th, 2008 at 2:04 pm
Mom424: No, intelligent design is a theory which many people belive. And one definition of a theory is “an assumption based on limited information…” (Answers.com). You said, “if 50% of a pop believes that aids is caused by evil spirits…”, and I don’t think that that holds any water. However, billions of people in the world believe in intelligent design so I think that it would be idiotic to not tell school children that it is an accepted (not excepted) theory of the origins of the universe. Your comparison makes huge leaps that hold no merit.
May 15th, 2008 at 2:08 pm
Alejandro: There is homophobia, racism, genocide, slavery, etc. with AND without religious ideals attached to them. And you say that there is no such thing as biblical divine inspiration…that is an opinion that has no basis in fact so by saying that statement you have to accept that someone else believes the exact opposite with equal fervor.
May 15th, 2008 at 2:08 pm
Codman:
Hitler was pretty egocentric. I doubt he really cared about the jews being happy if you know what I mean.
May 15th, 2008 at 2:12 pm
Now, I don’t know the Bible or Koran are “evil” books. Certainly they are full of acts that most of us will consider evil today, but we have the advantage of time. But it is time we consider them as products of their time, extract the good things in them (things that we can find in many other books, before and after these two were written) and discard the many bad things. Because it is stupid for people to kill each other in the name of God, as it would be stupid for people to be killing in the name of Zeus, Mithras, Wotan or the IPU (Invisible Pink Unicorn).
May 15th, 2008 at 2:14 pm
Troyfamu: Intelligent design is a theory according to the colloquial definition you noted above. It is not, however, a *scientific* theory, which is a whole other definition entirely. A scientific theory is a hypothesis that has been put forth that has a large amount of testable, observable evidence that supports it. A scientific theory also goes on to make other hypotheses that can likewise be tested and either supported or not supported by the prevailing empirical evidence. Intelligent design fails to meet both of these criteria, and as such, does not qualify as science. Because it is not science, and because the fundamental tenant of intelligent design is that there is a supernatural, intelligent entity that is outside of our realm of comprehension, it falls under the heading of religion. The separation of church and state dictates that religion cannot be taught as part of a public school’s regular curriculum, and thus intelligent design has no place in the classroom.
Furthermore, when Mom was referring to the “accepted theory” of origins, she was referring to evolution being the scientifically accepted theory of speciation, not the “generally” accepted theory, which I assure intelligent design is not.
May 15th, 2008 at 2:15 pm
143. jfrater
Na sorry mate, I meant the author the book ‘10 Books that screwed up the world’ has an agenda. Pro ID, conservative christian.
Oh and for the record I don’t think you can write a list like your one without having some kind of political agenda. Certainly someone who had more left wing liberal views wouldn’t have included The Communist Manifesto. Calling it the “most malicious book ever written” is just a bit over the top.
May 15th, 2008 at 2:28 pm
Alejandro: one thing, the Nazis took what books they wanted people to read and burned the rest. Taking the bad things out of any book leads to censorship (one of the worst things in US society).
SlickWilly: I totally agree with the first few sentences. However, since ID is accepted (by some non-scientists and amazingly some scientists) by billions, maybe it should be mentioned.
May 15th, 2008 at 2:28 pm
Someone said it very early on and I would agree. The Bible would have to be on here if you were to include religious texts. Think about Western society. The dominant religion is Christianity and every moral obligation we hold in our society can be linked to The Doctrine of Original Sin (though there are many different definitions of what it actually means to ’sin’). One could also argue that without the Bible, there would be no social order (similar to the way that Thomas Hobbes describes why government came to exist in his work, Social Contract, in which we come out of a state of nature into a litigious society for the sake of mankind. The dumbest can still kill the brightest and the strongest, etc. I suggest reading it.). I haven’t read through everyone’s comments but I felt my 2 cents could spark some interest!
May 15th, 2008 at 2:34 pm
troyfamu: If a parent wishes to expose his or her child to the “theory” of intelligent design, it should be done at home or in the church. It should not be done in the classroom. And I would not go so far as to say that ID is accepted by billions. Among developed nations, evolution is by far the prevailing theory. Evolution and intelligent design are incompatible with each other; you either believe in evolution or you believe in intelligent design, there is no middle ground. That being said, even the vast majority of christians the world over accept evolution as scientific fact. It is only really in the United States that christian fundamentalists have pushed their agenda onto the public school system time and time again. It gives the appearance of a wide acceptance of intelligent design, but really it is only the loudest minority that purposely creates that illusion.
It has no place in school, and it has no place being offered in education as an alternative theory to the scientifically validated evolutionary theory.
May 15th, 2008 at 2:49 pm
Slick: The trouble is, there is much middle ground. Some Christians believe that evolution is ID from a god or gods. Some believe that the big bang was ID. Some believe the earth is only 6000 years old and it was created by an ID. My point: Imagine your a teacher, teaching the origins of man. A student asks you where humans came from and you, correctly, answer with the theory of evolution (I believe in that, too). You say that it all started with hot gases and liquid and scientific, latin terms and the students’ young mind absorbs it a now it is fact to him. Then the same student asks where the gases and liquid and Latin terms came from and you say big bang. You tell the student about huge expansion in the blink of an eye and how the universe is still expanding today and always will. Again, the student loves it. Then he/she asks where the big bang came from and all you can say is…pause…pause…i don’t know because there are no scientific facts about what went on before that. So, you could say it was luck or one in a 10^123456789 chance or this or that. Or…you could say, we don’t know but here is what billions of people in the world believe.
May 15th, 2008 at 3:09 pm
troyfamu: You are incorrect. The theory of evolution posits that all animals and plants that are alive today share a common ancestory with a single, single-celled life form. Intelligent design posits that the species as we know them were created separately and distinctly from one another by a designer (god) and allowed to flourish from their initial conception. The two theories are incompatible. Either common ancestory exists or it does not. Those christians that are able to satsify their belief in evolution and their belief in god believe in god-directed evolution, not intelligent design. It is an entirely separate concept.
Further, if I were a teacher, I would tell the truth in that situation. “There is not much we know about what existed just prior to the Big Bang, as science has shown that at the level of a quantum singularity, physics as we know it breaks down and the information-gathering system we have is lost. If you would like to hear theories regarding pre-existence prior to the Big Bang, I encourage you to ask your parents and do your own research.”
The problem with your “billions of people in the world believe” statement is that billions of people believe thousands of different things. If none are science, why should credence be lent to one particular view over any of the others? Science is grounded in fact and a search for the truth. Intelligent design is grounded in faith and belief in one particular truth. As such, it is inherently biased and again, has no business being present in the public educational atmosphere.
May 15th, 2008 at 3:09 pm
troyfamu; No you couldn’t because 1st – its wrong and not based in science. 2nd – Billions don’t believe it.
I am old. At least in cyberspace years. I live in Canada, we have 2 publicly funded school systems. Public (secular) and private (Roman Catholic). Both teach evolution, when asked what caused the Big Bang, they answer either I don’t know or the scientists are working on it. Or if they’re really on the ball, they explain about alternate dimensions and the current hypothesis of a collision. They don’t say GOD. Even the RC schools have a separate class for religion. It does not enter the science class. I would wager that every other western country excluding the USA is the same.
Belief is not science. Science requires proof.
May 15th, 2008 at 3:58 pm
regarding the bible:
i have known lots of people that had life altering experiences from reading it and they were all positive
as unbelievable as some of the stories in the bible are it definitely has had a positive effect on millions of people.
not to discount the negatives though.
May 15th, 2008 at 4:09 pm
I think Origin of the species should be #1 particularly if the prince is included. The ideas in the book fueled more genocide than any other book.
May 15th, 2008 at 4:38 pm
WOULDN’T IT BE NICE,
if those of like minds,
lived peacefully within their own borders.
Doing what they whole-heartedly believe,
to be the one right way to live.
The ONE right way for THEM to live.
While over the hills, and not too far away,
all around them, but not amongst them,
Lived other TRIBES.
Who lived peacefully within their own borders.
Doing what the whole-heartedly believe,
to be the one right way to live.
The ONE right way for THEM to live.
What works for them.
Fuck Mass Culture, Fuck this world wide Mono-Cultural Melting Pot Bullshit, that’s what I say.
May 15th, 2008 at 4:48 pm
Another regarding the Bible-
I think it’s amazingly narrow-minded to say that the Bible “caused” the Crusades, persecution of the Jews, the Klan, Chick-Fil-A, etc…the Bible didn’t cause any of these things. What caused these things was a MISREADING of the Bible and a misapplication of what’s in there. I think the most avowed atheist would have a hard time reading the Gospel and the words of Jesus and concluding that he advocated violence and persecution in any form. Go read the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5-7, in case you’re wondering) and come back and say that dipwads like Jerry Falwell or Oral Roberts or Ralph Reed actually believe and follow any of that stuff. Baloney! What they follow is some narrow interpretation of the Bible that they can use as a cudgel to foist their “morality” on narrow/weak-minded followers.
Don’t believe me? Then explain how “resist not evil,” “turn the other cheek,” the Golden Rule (”So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you”), and “judge not lest ye be judged” could lead to wholesale slaughter of Muslims, witch burnings, the Inquisition, or any of the other horrors so-called “christians” have laid on the world. It’s impossible to draw that connection! Whether you want to believe Jesus was an historical figure or not, those words are attributed to him and so-called “followers” of Jesus say that they’re following his words. Heck, when asked what the greatest commandment was his response was “to love others as much as you love yourself.” I don’t think that kind of thinking leads to violence, death, and destruction.
It’s sad to me that so much of what Jesus taught has been corrupted, co-opted, mis-quoted, and otherwise munged up over the years to serve very selfish agendas. If you’re a Christian the teachings of Jesus are what really matter, not the witch-stoning, food-restricting stuff that came before. The Old Testament “fire n’ brimstone” crapola (as well as the other homophobic, misogynistic, and ridiculously-restrictive “laws” found there) was completely superseded by the teachings of Jesus.
If you haven’t read it yet, go check out “My Year of Living Biblically” by A.J. Jacobs to read one of the most amazing meditations on the absurdity of true “fundamentalism.” Not only is it impossible (there are too many contradictions, etc.) but unless you’re a scholar of ancient languages its patently stupid to think that you’re taking the (English or other language translation) of the Bible “literally.” It’s morally and intellectually bankrupt and it’s high time that people finally just laughed off those idiots and moved on.
Sorry for the long-winded response, but I thought it was important to point some of this stuff out to those of you bashing the Bible (or the Koran for that matter, but that’s an entirely different post). Go read the New Testament (or just go find a compendium of the words of Jesus) and THEN come back and tell us all how destructive those words are.
May 15th, 2008 at 4:53 pm
“Alejandro: one thing, the Nazis took what books they wanted people to read and burned the rest. Taking the bad things out of any book leads to censorship (one of the worst things in US society).”
troyfamu, I am not suggesting that we should burn any books, including the Bible or the Koran (by the way, in Nazi Germany, the Origin of the Species, was burnt). I didn’t mean it in the spirit of censoring Leviticus or Deuteronomy or the rape, genocide, slavery condoning that is within the pages of the Bible. They should be there. Read the Bible, appropiate the good things and discard the rest. Same with the Koran and other religious books. Same with any other book. Same with Batman and Archie comics. For example, take Jefferson’s Bible.
“And you say that there is no such thing as biblical divine inspiration…that is an opinion that has no basis in fact so by saying that statement you have to accept that someone else believes the exact opposite with equal fervor.”
What do you think the characteristics of a divinely-inspired book would be? I think it should have no contradictions, be historically accurate as much as possible and have an absolute moral. The Bible has many contradictions, is historically inaccurate and we have rejected many of its morals (If stoning people was good in those times, why is it not now?). We can’t even say for sure that the most important persona in Christianity actually existed. So the Bible was either divinely-inspired or it wasn’t. If the origin of the Bible is divine, God must be joking with us.
“Alejandro: There is homophobia, racism, genocide, slavery, etc. with AND without religious ideals attached to them.”
I agree with this to an extent. To be homophobic, racist, etc. you only need dogmatic thinking. And many times, religious thinking is dogmatic.
May 15th, 2008 at 5:12 pm
To Elrod:
The Golden Rule is not a christian invention. It is found in many religions and cultures.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethic_of_reciprocity
It has been argued by Biblical sholars that there is no idea of hell in the OT. The idea of Hell was most certainly introduced in the NT.
“The doctrine of eternal punishment is in perfect harmony with the savagery of the men who made the orthodox creeds. It is in harmony with torture, with flaying alive, and with burnings. The men who burned their fellow-men for a moment, believed that God would burn his enemies forever.
– Robert Green Ingersoll, “Crumbling Creeds”
“Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.”
- Jesus most probably didn’t exist, but he was right with this.
May 15th, 2008 at 5:32 pm
Mark and others – please re-read the blurb for Behe’s book – it does not say that the book claims fundamentalism as fact – it says that the book has FUELED fundamentalists who quote it to support anti-evolutionary ideas. This is true. You are reading something in to the blurb that is not there. The book – by disputing some “accepted” scientific ideas – has given fuel to fundamentalists even though the book itself does not agree with fundamentalist ideas. Please don’t argue against something which is not there – read carefully what is written and debate that if you don’t agree.
The blurb says:
1) The book has FUELED (not stated or supported) fundamentalists
2) The scientific community has rejected its arguments
This does not mean it is supporting creationism, it means that fundamentalists use some of its content to argue that Darwin was wrong and that evolution is false. This has nothing to do with what Behe intended – it has to do with its misuse by fundamentalists.
May 15th, 2008 at 6:02 pm
You didn’t put the Bible, this list sucks.
And 10 books are too few for such list!
May 15th, 2008 at 6:32 pm
I’m a Christian… Big time. Yet I still read the lists on this site everyday…
May 15th, 2008 at 6:46 pm
Jamie: I can’t remember the comment but I think someone said “I saw it somewhere else on listverse”. Does it weird you out that LV is being used to reference LV, or that Listverse may become the new Wiki?
Creepy!
May 15th, 2008 at 8:15 pm
An Inconvenient Truth by Al Gore.
May 15th, 2008 at 8:18 pm
Slick-
May 15th, 2008 at 9:53 pm
Kreachure: I did read that and I realized that’s why it was on the list. I however wanted to discuss some ways in which the bible would be perfect on the list rather than just yell out that Jamie didn’t put it on there.
May 15th, 2008 at 11:47 pm
Books are not evil…. they are simply mis-informed authors or misunderstood readers.
It’s all about perception, and how you interpret what your reading.
To say that The Communist Manifesto (for example) is evil is incorrect. It was used BY humans for evil, but Marx did not intend to create oppressive societies, he was a believer in pure equality and classlessness and that is not evil. The book was misinterpreted… simple as that.
May 16th, 2008 at 12:59 am
Kfrater: I thought that was a movie.
May 16th, 2008 at 1:49 am
Hmm… Very interesting list!
May 16th, 2008 at 1:50 am
kfarter – What Part of an Inconvenient truth can be considered harmful?
May 16th, 2008 at 1:59 am
Nejikun: A lot of people consider it to be enviormentalist propoganda.
May 16th, 2008 at 2:13 am
Forget the book think about the award that should’ve gone to someone Actually important. Al Gore and the IPCC can go fuck themselves. All they have done is scare people into thinking the world will end Before the rapture. I’ve been meaning to get a tan anyway.
Question; What is the Carbon footprint of a mail bomb?
May 16th, 2008 at 2:15 am
In reply to: “Chris M; “discussed in public schools than get rid of the discussion all together.” What? not teach the origins of our planet? not teach science? not teach natural history? because some yahoos don’t agree?
I sincerely hope you never run for school trustee. And if you do, you better not win. I can’t believe you said that.”
Is natural history a necessity for high school students, if so, why?
I said nothing about not teaching science. General science is necessary to understanding how the world works; it’s applicable to all types of fields ranging from medicine to technology.
May 16th, 2008 at 2:23 am
Maybe it would be better if you explained why it shouldn’t be taught? Enough people have called you out on it maybe you are wrong, if not explain why you are right. It is wise to defend what you said.
On the up side I think most of us Really want to hear this.
May 16th, 2008 at 2:30 am
Randall,
You’re putting words in my mouth.
My argument is not that Evolution is pointless, my point is that is it a necessity for grade school children and teenagers to be taught it? Grade school is the base for the fields we choose to be in post-secondary. Universities and colleges are where we expand our philosophies in those fields.
I was taught about the origins of species in high school and to be quite honest I just don’t see why it’s a necessity for grade school curriculum. The way I see it is that it’s what we evolved into, the civilizations and philosophies that shaped our world, that hold the most importance to people and the general future of humanity.
May 16th, 2008 at 2:44 am
I loved this post very informative and well written.
May 16th, 2008 at 4:58 am
Chris M;
It’s a very good thing that you are not in charge of our education system. Our kids would leave school being able to read and write and thats about it. And not very well read if you’re going to avoid natural history and origin theory.
One of the first questions to spring up during a discussion of dinosaurs (kindergarten, Grade 1?) is where did they go? Natural curiosity next asks; What came after the dinosaurs? When did we get here? You provide no answer because it is not part of the curriculum? And it’s not part of the curriculum because it contradicts religion?
You would also have to forgo teaching physics. Once you start learning about gravity and orbiting bodies and our expanding universe, natural curiosity is going to ask all the questions you are trying to avoid.
Better skip biology too, learning about DNA/RNA, cell reproduction, adaptation of living systems, all provoke questions with uncomfortable answers for the fundamentalist crowd.
We better be careful with chemistry too. Can’t have folks wondering about the fundamental building blocks of life. Get down to the atom, you just gotta wonder what the atoms are made of and where these parts came from.
There is a natural progression learning; You can’t leave out massive chunks of knowledge because that knowledge is offensive to a few.
May 16th, 2008 at 5:55 am
“The only reason there exists something of a Western civilization is because there’s separation of Church and State” – Alejandro # 232
Uh, dude, I think you’re more than just a little bit wrong here. Much of the foundation of Western Civilization is because of the Catholic Church after Constantine. There wasn’t much of a separation of church and state. Much of that idea was brought about by the American Revolution.
And I see that none of the semi-literate trolls out there bothered to read my earlier scripts on posting the ubiquitous one-liner “You forgot the Bible” Guess I shouldn’t be surprised, I guess if you can still catch re-runs of the Dukes of Hazzard then I should of expected it.
May 16th, 2008 at 6:36 am
ChrisM:
I put *words* in your mouth? What?
No, Chris… I’m too smart to *make up* the dumb shit you spouted here. I QUOTE:
“I honestly don’t see why either side cares so deeply about trivial facts such as how old the earth is.” YOU said that. Incredibly dumb.
“If someone wants to believe that Evolution is bullocks why does it matter?” YOU said that. Once again, incredibly dumb, and blindly ignorant as well.
“If it angers people from both sides and neither wants the others point of view discussed in public schools than get rid of the discussion all together.” YOU said that. The things wrong with that statement are so legion I can’t begin to cover them. But I already did anyway, in my previous post.
Mom’s answer to you is excellent. Clearly you know absolutely ZIP about education and seem to have gotten little, if anything, out of your own. This isn’t always the fault of teachers and schools. Some minds, such as yours, are simply anathema to knowledge and refuse to accept it.
Evolution is the BASIS of modern biology. To not teach it would be to not teach biology, pure and simple.
Again though, Mom has made the argument for me (bless you Mom, I have no patience this morning). I can’t even believe we’re having this conversation.
YOUR LITTLE LIFE IS BUILT UPON the knowledge and learning of centuries of your brother and sister humans, Chris. And that knowledge, as any idiot can tell you, is best passed down when one is YOUNG, because as the mind grows older it closes doors within itself, both conscious and unconscious. This is why someone who has been totally uneducated can’t simply, upon reaching the age of 22, enter graduate school to study Quantum Mechanics or Economics or what have you. It isn’t simply that they haven’t gone through the motions of attending any school *before* that—but it’s because they would be, by that time, totally unequipped and unable to grasp and learn the concepts they’d be exposed to.
May 16th, 2008 at 8:26 am
Virtually everything this guy (frater?) said in his caustic evaluation of Behe’s book is totally false (my reply in BOLD):
“This book has helped to fuel (through pseudo-science and untruths COLLEGE & HIGH SCH TEXTS HAVE MANY UNTRUTHS IN THE EVOLUTION SECTION – E.G. ‘GILL SLITS’ ‘MISSING LINK’ CITATIONS, ALLEGED TREE OF LIFE, DESCENT WITH MODIFICATION, ETC.) the idea that evolution is false (THE AUTHOR DOES NOT DEFINE WHAT KIND OF EVOLUTION – MACROEVOLUTION IS ABSURD AND QUITE FALSE) and that a literal interpretation of the Book of Genesis (NOT ONCE DOES BEHE – AN EVOLUTIONIST, YES, HE’S AN EVOLUTIONIST! – APPEAL TO THE B. OF GENESIS. NOT ONCE IN HIS BOOK) is the only possible manner in which the earth was created (dARWINISTS ARE DOGMATIC IN STATING THAT dARWINISM IS THE ONLY POSSIBLE MANNER IN WHICH THE EARTH EVOLVED). Despite much refutation from the Scientific community (THERE HAS BEEN MUCH SCREAMING & KICKING FROM THE SECULAR, SECULAR ‘SCIENTIFIC’ COMMUNITY I’M DELIGHTED TO SAY – BUT VIRTUALLY NO ‘REFUTATION’), many fundamentalists still use this as a “source” for proof that evolution is not true (THOSE WHO BELIEVE THE BIBLE IS HISTORICALLY ACCURATE USE BEHE’S BK – BUT UNDERSTAND WE CANNOT ‘PROOVE’ MACROEVOLUTION TO BE FALSE. SCIENCE HAS SHOWN, HOWEVER, THAT MACROEVOLUTION CANNOT AND DID NOT HAPPEN). The book itself was not peer reviewed as Behe claimed under oath (CITATION, PLEASE), and the Science community has overwhelming rejected it (NOTICE HOW THIS GUY CAPITALIZES ‘SCIENCE’ – ALL BOW BEFORE THE ALTAR OF SCIENCE – YOU OVER THERE – BOW LOWER BEFORE dARWIN! BTW – IT’S SECULAR sCIENCE – NOT SCIENCE).”
One last comment from evolutionist/paleontologist A.G. Fisher, “Both the origin of life and the origin of the major groups of animals remain unknown” (2003)
Hey frater – please list 3 facts of macroevolution for darwinian skeptics such as myself.
May 16th, 2008 at 8:44 am
Note to randall -
Biology (I have an advanced zoology degree from a secular university) and MACROevolution have nothing at all to do with each other. The research I did (published in a peer-reviewed journal) said nothing about evolutionism – nor did I find myself having to genuflect before darwin’s altar.
I have a copy of Levinton’s 2nd edition before me – it has macroevolution in the title. Please list for me page numbers where Levinton addresses the ‘fact’ of macroevolution.
I’m waiting.
While you’re looking for citations for macroevolution, remember what PETER FOREY said in his review of Levinton’s book (J. of Paleontology77(1)): “Do not expect answers” – p. 200. What a riot! Forey’s phrase should be carved in stone above all ‘evolutionary biology’ (an oxymoron – like rap music) departments.
Macroevolution & biology go together like honesty and politics.
May 16th, 2008 at 9:22 am
windarr:
Okay, let’s cut the bullshit.
A) Science has NOT shown that “macroevolution” is false and did not happen. This is simply a flat-out lie and distortion. Typical of creationist assholes, such as yourself, who attack this well-established model of biology the way politicians attack each other–with untruths, half-truths, and warped citings. That isn’t scientific, windarr, and clearly you are no scientist. You’re just a windbag with a bias and too little knowledge of the subject (enough to satisfy your bias but not enough to truly educate you–but then your mind is shut off to education anyway, no doubt). I detest using internet links, but screw it, here’s a link for you, windarr: http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA202.html
B) No one “bows” to science or Darwin, pinhead. I PERSONALLY know several highly-credentialed and even internationally known biologists. (Can you say the same thing? I doubt it). NOT ONE of them is dogmatic about evolution; they simply view it as a well-supported model that fits the facts MUCH better than any other. This is the way scientists think and behave. Not like priestly acolytes to some idol. People such as yourself continue to lie about this, though, because it serves your small-minded purpose—and also probably because you cannot conceive of others taking views based solely on intellectual reasoning. And why? Because…
C) Your description of yourself as a “darwinian skeptic” is a shallow and transparent cover for the truth–which is that you are a creationist.
And by the way, the lower-case “d” for “Darwinists” and so on is the kind of cutesy trick employed by people of sophomoric minds. It says, “ooo, ooo, look at me! I disrespect Darwin!” I’d advise you to grow up, but I’m convinced from your rhetoric that you’re at the highest state of maturity you’ll ever reach.
Time limits me going further with this at present.
May 16th, 2008 at 9:36 am
Hey Jfrater;
Seems all that yelling pretty much proves your point. Exactly why it is included on the list.
Randall; You don’t need a PHD to know that macro-evolution is just micro-evolution added up. With a few giant leaps due to catastrophe and naturally occuring mutation.
Interesting that you can get a more reasoned argument out of a house wife/mother than a scholar.
By the way a blessing by me is likely to get you closer to Beelzebub than the other guy.
May 16th, 2008 at 9:39 am
windarr:
(COLLEGE & HIGH SCH TEXTS HAVE MANY UNTRUTHS IN THE EVOLUTION SECTION – E.G. ‘GILL SLITS’ ‘MISSING LINK’ CITATIONS, ALLEGED TREE OF LIFE, DESCENT WITH MODIFICATION, ETC.)
The facts of evolution may be untruths to you, but by and large concepts like the phylogenetic tree and “descent with modification” are accepted as truth by the overwhelming majority of the biological science community. Just because you may not agree does not mean that these concepts do not hold validity, being well-researched and derived from supporting empirical evidence.
(THE AUTHOR DOES NOT DEFINE WHAT KIND OF EVOLUTION – MACROEVOLUTION IS ABSURD AND QUITE FALSE)
The blanket term evolution includes both and macro- and microevolution, and though you may find the idea of macroevolution “absurd and quite false” does not make it so. The modern evolutionary synthesis has provided many predictions concerning macroevolution that have proven true, providing support for the idea that macroevolution is scientific reality. As far as science is concerned, macroevolution is a proven fact.
(NOT ONCE DOES BEHE – AN EVOLUTIONIST, YES, HE’S AN EVOLUTIONIST! – APPEAL TO THE B. OF GENESIS. NOT ONCE IN HIS BOOK)
This is correct, Behe is a microevolutionist, and does not appeal to any biblical references in his book, Darwin’s Black Box. However, if you had read the description under the book carefully, you would see that nowhere does Jfrater state that Behe’s makes such an appeal. Rather, he claims the book is used by christian fundamentalists as fuel for their belief, which often originate from a literal interpretation of the book of Genesis.
(dARWINISTS ARE DOGMATIC IN STATING THAT dARWINISM IS THE ONLY POSSIBLE MANNER IN WHICH THE EARTH EVOLVED).
This is also true, because all available scientific evidence has shown that evolution is the most likely mechanism to be able to explain the diversity of life on earth, and no other competing theory has provided any empirical support to offer itself as a viable alternative. If there were support for other theories, such theories would be mainstream in the scientific community. As such, the only evidence we have supports evolution, and it is such a vast body of evidence that scientists the world over have agreed that evolution is the only theory that can explain global biodiversity.
(THERE HAS BEEN MUCH SCREAMING & KICKING FROM THE SECULAR, SECULAR ‘SCIENTIFIC’ COMMUNITY I’M DELIGHTED TO SAY – BUT VIRTUALLY NO ‘REFUTATION’),
This is incorrect. There have been many biological scientists that have refuted the central claims of Behe’s book, particularly those concerning Behe’s “most damning” evidence, the concept of irreducible complexity. A couple of online versions of legtimate, peer-reviewed journal articles, just for a taste:
http://www.cbs.dtu.dk/staff/dave/Behe.html
http://udel.edu/~mcdonald/mousetrap.html
http://www.simonyi.ox.ac.uk/dawkins/WorldOfDawkins-archive/Catalano/box/nature.shtml
http://ase.tufts.edu/cogstud/papers/behe.htm
And a veritable library of information from well-respected biological scientists about the topics that Behe uses to try to make his case for ID: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/behe/publish.html
I invite you to study these sources closely, and you will see that Behe’s concepts, particularly his central, fundamental concept, irreducible complexity, have time and time proven to fail under scrutiny.
(THOSE WHO BELIEVE THE BIBLE IS HISTORICALLY ACCURATE USE BEHE’S BK – BUT UNDERSTAND WE CANNOT ‘PROOVE’ MACROEVOLUTION TO BE FALSE. SCIENCE HAS SHOWN, HOWEVER, THAT MACROEVOLUTION CANNOT AND DID NOT HAPPEN).
Interesting you say this. “We cannot prove macroevolution to be false,” followed closely by “Science has shown that macroevolution cannot and did not happen.” Please explain to me how, if we cannot somehow prove that macroevolution is false, that science has shwon that it cannot and did not happen? This is a logical inconsistency and it damages your credibility. You cannot prove something did not happen if its unfalsifiable, rather like creationism. This theory is indeed unfalsifiable, and as such, no evidence can be produced to refute it, because any such evidence is interpreted by creationists to be in support of their original argument. In any case, this does not matter, as macroevolution is certainly falsifiable. Many predictions about macroevolution have been made, the negation of which would have detracted support from it. However, the hypotheses have proven true across the board and instead lent considerable support to the idea. I invite you to thoroughly read the following page:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/default.html#common_descent “29+ evidences for macroevolution”
“The book itself was not peer reviewed as Behe claimed under oath” (CITATION, PLEASE)
This, I cannot say one way or the other. The original online citations for this have disappeared. Either way, it does not mean that Behe’s book was above criticism.
(NOTICE HOW THIS GUY CAPITALIZES ‘SCIENCE’ – ALL BOW BEFORE THE ALTAR OF SCIENCE – YOU OVER THERE – BOW LOWER BEFORE dARWIN! BTW – IT’S SECULAR sCIENCE – NOT SCIENCE).”
Cute. You’re intentions have been revealed. There is nothing more on this that I can do to damage your credibility more than you have already done to yourself.
May 16th, 2008 at 9:42 am
Windarr:
Further:
1) an “advanced” zoology degree, eh? Zoology is a VERY broad field. It does not guarantee by ANY means that you had to do the same kind of hard science work that a Micrrobiologist has to do, for example, in order to earn a PhD. And I think if you’d earned a PhD, you would have said so, by the way. “Advanced degree” is exaggerated-speak for “earned an MS, probably in the broadest category of Zoology that was available.” And…
2) a “secular university,” huh? Well I won’t ask you to name it, which I think would be prying (I never name my own university, for privacy reasons). But we can guess it wasn’t a highly-accredited institution… or at least, *I* can guess that, because I frankly don’t doubt said guess, given your attitude and rhetoric. OR at the least, we can say that you have failed your institution as a former student and graduate. Because instead of coming out with the mind of a scholar, you’re nothing but a biased mouthpiece for an unscientific worldview.
And the reason I can say this? Because A) if you were truly a well-established and highly-educated scientist, who had been educated at a truly well-established and highly-accredited institution, you would not be on a little List website trying to refute people’s beliefs in Darwin. Or, B) if you chose to do so, for fun (as I do) then you wouldn’t have opened with a shallow attack (as you did) with a lot of cant and wildly distorted statements, but would have written a thoughtful piece in an effort to educate us poor know-nothings.
And I love the ol’ shallow trick of demanding refutations of texts of your own choosing, and then the cutesy “I’m waiting.” It’s an old rhetorical sleight-of-hand used by those who only know how to argue from authority and to overwhelm by emotion.
If you were right and had proof, windarr, the entire science of biology would be brought down. It isn’t, and you aren’t right, and haven’t got your proof.
May 16th, 2008 at 9:53 am
This is really quite amusing.
Look what happens when someone stands to say the darwinian emperor has no clothes!
randall resorts to profanity and name-calling, always a clear indication that his darwinian position is tenuous. I’ll not respond in kind, but simply offer a recent quote from atheist John Chaikowsky in Geotimes, v 50, Apr 2005, pg. 6, “They tell the public that the science behind [macro]evolution is the same science that sent people to the moon and cures diseases. It’s not. The science behind evolution is not empirical, but forensic … no testing, no observations, no repeatability, no falsification …I think this is what the public discerns — that evolution is just a bunch of just-so stories disguised as legitimate science.”
How many times must it be said? Creationists (randall, all Creationists are ‘darwinian skeptics’!) love biology. I’m proof with undergrad & graduate degrees in biology/zoology. I just don’t stomach the darwinian religion that is shoe-horned into otherwise good science.
“The fact of evolution is the backbone of biology, and biology is thus in the peculiar position of being a science founded on an unproved theory—is it then a science or a faith? Belief in the theory of evolution is thus exactly parallel to belief in special creation—both are concepts which believers know to be true but neither, up to the present, has been capable of proof.” -L. Harrison-Matthews, Introduction to the ORIGIN OF THE SPECIES, 1971, ed.
Faith? darwinists have a truckload, believing that a tasteless, odorless, colorless gas (hydrogen) allegedly formed at the big bang (which is unscientific: Eric Lerner, New Scientist, May 22, ‘04) – through time – became people.
“We think we understand the universe, but we only understand four percent of everything,” said James Watson Cronin, who won the 1980 Nobel Prize for physics. Physorg.com, Sept., 27, 2007 ‘In the dark: science still mystified by stuff of universe’
Speaking of origins, paleontologist A.G. Fisher said in 2003, “Both the origin of life and the origin of the major groups of animals remain unknown.”
So much for the fact of macroevolution.
May 16th, 2008 at 10:04 am
Of all the times for the site to fuck me over, it has to be now. Thanks, internet gods. I set out a rather lengthy missive in response to windarr’s post, but unfortunately, the post must have gotten lost in translation. *Sigh*
For now, I’ll say this:
Windarr: How did you manage to get through school with an advanced degree in zoology while maintaining the idea that evolution is false? Pay lip service to Darwin while striving for your degree? I mean, you can’t honestly expect us to believe you somehow have an advanced (and by advanced I assume you mean a graduate or post-graduate degree) degree in biological science by rejecting the very phylogenetic tree that zoology bases its classification system on. That’s simply absurd. Furthermore, you’re lack of knowledge about evolution leads me to believe that you are not who you say you are. Even if you reject Darwinism, I doubt you could have gotten through graduate school in zoology without a thorough understanding of how evolution is supposed to work. It’s a major part of the curriculum in any biological science, particulary zoology. This statement particularly troubles me: “BUT UNDERSTAND WE CANNOT ‘PROOVE’ MACROEVOLUTION TO BE FALSE. SCIENCE HAS SHOWN, HOWEVER, THAT MACROEVOLUTION CANNOT AND DID NOT HAPPEN” So you go from attacking evolution with a scientific criticism – unfalsifiabilty – and in the same breath turn around and say that it has been proven false. This is a logical contradiction, and, even if you disagree with macroevolution, you cannot be a legitimate professional zoologist and disagree with the scientific fallibility of macroevolution. This is a blatant falsehood, and is cited as one of the most well-parroted but misunderstood conceptions of macroevolution, something that applies to the average joe-schmo creationists but not to legitimate professional zoologists as you claim to be. Macroevolutionary theory posits hypotheses and makes predictions. Such hypotheses are easily falsifiable, if the predictions are found to be inaccurate. To this date, the predictions postulated by macroevolutionary theory have not been falsified. This does not mean they are unfalsifiable. It means that macroevolution has never encounted a serious, credible damaging attack based on the scientific method of prediction and outcome.
Even the most credible ID-ists are scientists that work within the system, and acknowledge its fundamental tenants. You, however, seem to have the liberty of enjoying your position while rejecting the fundamentals of the scientific theory. This is incompatible. I would venture to say that, unless you can produce legitimate credentials explaining your position and the credibility of your degrees, you are nothing but a lying charlatan.
In any case, you ask for 3 facts of microevolution. I offer you 30: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/default.html#common_descent
May 16th, 2008 at 10:25 am
Randall, Slickwilly; Can either of you two explain to me the alternate to evolution? and Common origin? Does it involve magic wands?
I believe in both of the above, not because I’m brainwashed, befuddled or stupid, but because is makes sense. No?
I require an explanation, and in not quite phd speak, OK?
May 16th, 2008 at 10:52 am
edit:
“In any case, you ask for 3 facts of *macroevolution*…”
May 16th, 2008 at 10:56 am
So short on time just now… maddening.
But to respond quickly:
windarr:
No, I use profanity and name-calling when dealing with *assholes*—such as yourself—not because my “Darwinian position is tenuous.”
I don’t mind clarifying that sort of thing.
And now you’re calling into question the very foundations of physics and chemistry, I see, with this nonsense about hydrogen.
windarr, you’re obviously nothing but a crank. If you really did earn a degree (which I doubt even more now) than it had to be from some god-forsaken place where the students’ SAT scores are lower than my credit rating after my divorce.
Now, if you don’t mind, I’m compelled to get back to the work calling me, in a world of truly intelligent and open-minded students whom I respect and cherish not because their families had the money to pay for an education at this wonderful and prestigious university in the northeast, but because they are all bright young scholars who would laugh at you in the face for your nonsense, if they had the opportunity. The faculty, of course, would merely shake their head in disgust. As I do.
We aren’t the dogmatists, here, clown. That’s you and your fellows in spades.
May 16th, 2008 at 10:58 am
Mom424: Simply put, there is no major, scientifically-viable alternative to the theory of evolution. I can’t explain the alternative to you in anything other than religious, pseudo-scientific terms. An intelligent, sentient, purposeful entity that exists beyond the laws of time and space, indeed beyond the visible, testable universe, actively created the world and everything in it, and affected active change in the world through the use of unexplainable supernatural powers. This entity created each distinct species unique from one another, and then allowed the process of microevolution to allow each distinct species to adapt to its environment, but not to the point where sexual reproductive isolation occured, effectively producing a new species. No, as stated, each species was created distinct from each other species.
That’s the best I can do, Mom. But, I mean, we’ve had this conversation before and you already know all of this.
May 16th, 2008 at 11:11 am
Slick;
So, I was right. It does involve magic wands. I thought by the tone of windarr that there was some other non-diety involved alternative. That is whats so scary about pseudo-science; it sounds reasonable. That is why I requested the clarification. Casual readers may have been left with the impression that there was some sort of scientific basis for denial.
Thank-you.
May 16th, 2008 at 11:27 am
windar:
“The science behind evolution is not empirical, but forensic … no testing, no observations, no repeatability, no falsification …I think this is what the public discerns — that evolution is just a bunch of just-so stories disguised as legitimate science.”
I know this wasn’t what you said and that you quoted someone. However I am confused by this statement considering there have been PLENTY of experiments and observations that prove evolution happens. I learned about most of them in college even just in my biology textbooks including experiments as “micro” as bacteria and as “macro” as finches.
May 16th, 2008 at 11:41 am
Not sure why everyone keeps asking wheres the Bible. Before the list begins JF says that he is not going to state the obvious. The Bible, The Quaraan etc… would defiantly be the obvious.
May 16th, 2008 at 11:55 am
Whoops I just wanted to clarify something I said
I meant as “micro” as bacteria developing resistance to antibiotics and as “macro” as finches who have diverged and developed into seperate species.
May 16th, 2008 at 12:44 pm
C’mon guys. Books don’t kill people. People kill people!
May 16th, 2008 at 12:47 pm
but, unstable people get ideas from books
May 16th, 2008 at 1:09 pm
MPW; Yes, and they get ideas from Xenu, and aliens, and don’t forget microwave rays from power lines. Unstable people will always find something to either latch on to or blame.
May 16th, 2008 at 1:10 pm
I think the idea that Behe’s book is on this list is pretty absurd. You write that “This book has helped to fuel (through pseudo-science and untruths) the idea that evolution is false and that a literal interpretation of the Book of Genesis is the only possible manner in which the earth was created.”
The idea that God created is a pervasive belief in the U.S. that existed long before Behe wrote anything and persists to this day, even though only a tiny portion of the U.S. public has heard of Behe or his book.
A CBS poll indicates that 51% of the U.S. public believes that God created human beings in their present form. Another 30% believe that humans evolved, but that God guided the process (this belief is a variant of intelligent design, not Darwanism). Only 15% believe what Darwin proposes(i.e.that humans evolved, and God did not guide the process) see “http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/10/22/opinion/polls/main965223.shtml
To be clear, I am not at all trying to say that scientifics facts are established by public opinion. I am saying that it is a little foolish to think that Behe’s book has significantly effected public opinion on this topic. The extent to which naturalistic evolution is rejected by the general public is far too great to attribute to Behe.
May 16th, 2008 at 1:34 pm
mom424: Are you getting wise:>
May 16th, 2008 at 3:50 pm
Paul D;
I hope your statistics are somehow skewed. Otherwise 85% of Americans are friggin’ idiots. I don’t personally know one person who doesn’t believe in evolution/common origin. Not 1.
Holy crap you guys have a long way to go.
May 16th, 2008 at 4:13 pm
where the hell is the bible, and Darwain and Communism are great
May 16th, 2008 at 5:00 pm
I’d like to add the coments on this list to the list.
May 16th, 2008 at 5:46 pm
COMMENTS LOL
May 16th, 2008 at 6:18 pm
Mom424: He doesn’t speak for most of us. “Don’t look at me, he’s not my friend.”
May 16th, 2008 at 7:20 pm
I laughed dryly when I saw this in the archive. My first thought was that I had a pretty good guess. “Mein Kampf.” And lookie here, I’m not the only one who thinks so.
Number six, “The Pivot of Civilization,” surprised me. In fact, I am completely amazed that anyone would take it seriously, considering the time frame. She’s female and it was written around Hitler’s time. (Although I will never look at the term “feminazi” the same way again.)
And don’t get me wrong. I’m a woman, too.
That number one there is amusing as well. But I do not think it belongs on the list. Because…it is pretty much the only one that does not cause deaths. (Besides 9, but that one is funny.)
May 16th, 2008 at 8:06 pm
So yeah… I know a lot of folks here in the good ol’ US of A that DO believe in evolution. A LOT more than 15% of people. I’d actually say it’s closer to… oh, I don’t know… a good 90%. But that’s just where I live, and I’m in the freakin Bible Belt, where people look at you funny if you say you aren’t a Christian (I’m not, sorry). Means a lot of Chrtistian folk agree that evolution was how it happened, and everyone who isn’t religious is of the same mindset. We’re not as backward as it would appear, Mom. (Mind if I call you Mom? I’s be an internet orphan.) I’m somewhat appalled at the statistics mentioned above. And shocked. And slightly skeptic. Scratch that, VERY skeptic.
May 16th, 2008 at 8:18 pm
Randall,
How exactly is eliminating the discussion on the origin of species, in grade school, going to prevent the ability of children and teenagers from being able to grasp theories and philosophies in post-secondary school?
Your turning this one point into an entire attack on education from my behalf, and that was never my point.
““I honestly don’t see why either side cares so deeply about trivial facts such as how old the earth is.” YOU said that. Incredibly dumb.”
It’s a trivial fact in the grand scheme of things. It’s not a necessity to teach grade schoolers the subject.
““If someone wants to believe that Evolution is bullocks why does it matter?” YOU said that. Once again, incredibly dumb, and blindly ignorant as well.”
Yes, I did post that and I stand by it. The sky isn’t going to fall because someone doesn’t accept Evolution, so why is there such a need to force the topic on children when there are so many parents unhappy with its teachings? Why not leave the topic to post-secondary teachings, when a person is old enough to make their own choices, and to parents who chose to teach their children about the subject?
May 16th, 2008 at 8:44 pm
ChrisM – I don’t want you to feel like I’m singling you out, but I read your last post and felt I had to respond.
I partially agree with you. Evolution is not something that will make a life or death difference in most people’s lives. However, I do feel strongly that it should remain part of grade school curriculum. My reason is that evolution is an important basis for the study of biology. It would be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to teach the similarities and differences between biological entities without first basing your explanations on the keystone of evolution.
Besides that, every aspect of school science curriculum strictly adheres to the scientific method just like the theory of evolution does. We can not teach creationism as science because, to put it simply, it isn’t. There is no way to test creationism, and creationism is not objective. Note that terms such as objective and theory have very specific definitions within the scientific community and they are not used loosely by any means. Creationism should be taught in theology studies.
I know this upsets alot of people, but I see it as no different from sex ed classes. The ultra-conservative factions want abstinence, and only abstinence taught, while the more liberal factions want an open discussion all all aspects. I tend to fall in to the liberal group on both issues. Talking about sex doesn’t make you a whore any more than talking about evolution makes you an atheist. People will always have the option to form their own beliefs, and many notable christians have managed to reconcile the differences between science and theology in their own minds.
May 16th, 2008 at 8:45 pm
i laughed at both mein kampf and the protocals of the elders of zion on the list. talk about bias.
May 16th, 2008 at 8:49 pm
ChrisM #299: We don’t leave it out of grade school because science shows that, as we get older, our minds slowly lose their ability to learn at the fast rate that seven and eight year olds do. I’m sure you’ve heard the saying “You can’t teach an old dog new tricks”? It’s true in more ways than one. He’s not just set in his ways, his brain is set like that for the long run, and it takes a lot to change it. It’s the same way with people. The older we get, the harder it is for us to accept new ideas, no matter how imbedded with fact they are. If you put off introducing anything controversial until they can think for themselves, it might be too late to actually get it in them enough to stick with them.
May 16th, 2008 at 9:04 pm
ChrisM: Post-Secondary school??? This gives me Two Ideas as to your education; Some ass backwards private school Or You’re not even American.
Either way, how can your opinions of the American education system be representative of most of America? Pubic schooling is the staple of upbringing, Our baby sitter, our sometimes first and second meals of the day, the next best thing to parental figures.
Private schools are Very well known for teaching Opinions and not Authentic Fact.
If you were educated Outside of the Us, Why would you try to use outright skewed statistics? Do you really think us that Ignorant?
___
“I want to be an astronaut when I grow up!” Commonly heard among CHILDREN!!! Why would they get that Idea and if they did follow their heart, wouldn’t education in the Sciences be needed. The Computer you are using has Direct historical significance to all things Space. What makes you think that the minerals, alloys, and electricity coursing through your machine right now would have come about? God Created them!!!! HA! We created them, We thought of them, We educated ourselves since the start!
Education, the Exact opposite if Ignorance. You go ahead and Not educate Your children. And I’ll educate My Children well enough to take care of their new pets.
May 17th, 2008 at 4:47 am
I apologize for referring to continuing education as post-secondary, as I’m Canadian and that’s what we refer to it as.
I’m personally not against the teaching of Evolution, but I do understand that it upsets enough people that perhaps some guidelines should be applied. Perhaps if they allowed students to opt-out of the sessions, on the teaching, with parental support that would please both sides…?
I just don’t like the idea of forcing it on people if it’s going to upset them so much
May 17th, 2008 at 6:58 am
The Bible isn’t a screwed up book of books, it had been badly mistranslated, mistated and misunderstood over the centuries.
The King James Bible was a bad version, since it would give the ruler the excuse to say, “All is good under my reign, that mean God is blessed with you people, peace and prosperity be upon you people,” OR “All is not well under my reign, that mean God is disappointed in you people and I’m going to have to punish you all as God entrusts me to do so,”.
The Qu’ran, on the other hand, should be on the list of 10 worst books. It is never misunderstood or mistranslated, all of the words and sayings were printed in Arabic of the 8th century A.D. and remains so to this day. It is responsible for more violence, conquests, forcible submission, slavery and oppression than any other holy book/books, including the Bible.
May 17th, 2008 at 8:11 am
You have to be kidding me. You do not understand John Dewey or pragmatism AT ALL.
You state that John Dewey thought that, “it IS the job of educators to teach people how to THINK, primarily… not to teach them “stuff.” (which is secondary, but necessary). But it quickly became forgotten that these two aims need to mesh together, and that the teaching of “stuff” can affect one’s ability to learn and think just as much as direct instruction in the processes of thinking.”
Yet you fail to recognize the fact that Dewey was an instrumentalist–he AGREED with what you are saying about the learning of facts and stuff being separate. His point was that teaching for tests (like the failed no child left behind is doing) is a mistake, yet he was not so foolish as to advocate rote memorized learning of his system. Rather, he was advocating a hands on approach to learning a discipline.
Want to learn science? You CAN NOT just sit in a class and hear facts that science has come up with to this date. You MUST get out there and DO science to understand it and its goals in any meaningful context.
I find the way that you’ve straw-manned his position utterly regrettable, as (if anything) we need to Deweyize our system a great deal more. To give you an example of how Dewey’s views were taken piecemeal rather than actually considered: Dewey came up with the ’scientific method’ simplification that you often find in science classrooms from the middle school level on up. Yet, he came up with it NOT as something to be memorized out of a context so much as for a tool in his arguments that the processes of thinking and acting should be emphasized (again, not to be memorized AS processes so much as actually DONE).
Most pragmatists do not accept anything like the claim that we ‘create’ truth–Dewey for damn sure didn’t.
You also unfairly criticize The Prince. Machiavelli was writing a descriptive manual which many have used normatively, how is that his fault?
May 17th, 2008 at 8:27 am
Chris M;
I explained in comment #268 why evolution/origin theory cannot wait until the post secondary years.It is the basis of all biology. It would be like moving directly to long-division without learning addition and subtraction first.
The questions must be answered as natural curiosity demands. Also curriculum is geared towards interest. Who isn’t interested in Dinosaurs in Grade 1. It is a traditional introduction to many subjects where I live. I and each of my children did dino stuff in grade 1. An introduction to Biology, Natural History, Reading, Spelling, Climate. All the while keeping the kids enthralled; they don’t even know they’re learning. Evolution of man is a natural extension of this. I remember that famous poster of the evolution of man being decoration in many classrooms. Since grade school.
I’m right, your wrong; carefully re-read the comment and if you still don’t agree, explain how my logic is flawed.
Mortivore;
You are more than welcome to call me “Mom”. Other than Cyn the Admin, I’m the oldest chicky (awright mother hen) around these parts. (I’m 46).
I too am very skeptical about the statistics quoted by Paul D. Too many people forget that the answer depends entirely on the question. Subtle cues will lead to the response you require. Even the order of questions will end-up with predetermined results. Do you believe in God?, Do you go to church?, etc., etc.,. Basically you trap the respondent into the answer you want. Folks don’t like to contradict themselves, they’d agree rather than appear foolish.
May 17th, 2008 at 9:11 am
Mom424,randall,slickwilly:
Can’t you make a list of top ten evidence for why evolution by natural selection is the most valid theory on the origin of life?
You guys seem to know a thing or two about it
And if you can’t would someone by able to give it a try?
May 17th, 2008 at 9:30 am
Mom424-
i’d resisted using that..now i know i must.
and yeah, i’m older than Mom. *sigh*
May 17th, 2008 at 10:47 am
You had me until I saw the number one choice. Then I lost all respect for the judgement of the writer.
Darwins theories are not sacred, they should be open to scepticism and scientific evaluation. That Behe has inspired Creationists…well, so what? I would rather see Creationists inspired than, say, communists.
May 17th, 2008 at 10:58 am
Cyn; sorry for blowing your cover. And you’re not very much older than me. We are of an age. And I’m not really too old for anything. Well maybe magic mushrooms.
Warningdon’treadthis; I’m not a scientist, so the things I am going to list will be generalizations. You need Slick (he’s a biologist I think) or Randall (astronomer, scholar, and resident know-it-all. This is not an insult, just a fact) for specifics.
1. DNA/RNA – All living things on earth encode their information the same way. They either use their own or hi-jack the host’s DNA for reproduction. Prions (cause of mad-cow disease) may be the exception; I’m not entirely up to date on the research in this field.
2. Proteins – All living things use proteins in the same ways. They are integral in all biological cells on earth. Specific proteins serve the same function in all living things. Either acting as catalysts or enzymes or specific structures. For example, Hair, finger nails, horns, scales same protein, different configuration.
3. Fossil evidence – No other process explains the preponderance of fossil evidence. No possible way all those creatures were alive together at one point in time. Explain archeopteryx any other way. Or homo-habilis for that matter.
4. Biological evidence – The cave animals whose eyes have atrophied and finally disappeared, have lost the ability to produce melanin (pigment), developed giant feelers etc.
5. Common-sense – There is no such thing as magic. Something can’t come from nothing. Ever.
That’s all I can think of right now, (it’s Saturday of a long week-end, I need to get to my garden), but I’m sure the scholars among us will fill out my list. Likely way more than the 10 points you requested.
May 17th, 2008 at 12:15 pm
Atlas Shrugged and Dianetics.
May 17th, 2008 at 12:50 pm
Regardless of how one feels about the Christian view of creation, I heartily disagree that is is somehow more damaging than works like Mein Kampf or The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. While both those book promote hate based upon race, creed, religion etc, Darwin’s Black Box seeks to expose what the author feels is a falsehood that continues to be promoted by secular science. I don’t care if someone believes in evolution or not, that doesn’t factor into how I value that person. But whether they hate people without cause, that certainly does.
May 17th, 2008 at 12:57 pm
“Silent Spring” should head the list. Responsible for more deaths, especially of children, in Africa and south Asia then the head count of Hitler, Stalin and Mao combined.
May 17th, 2008 at 1:00 pm
What’s remotely ‘evil’ about The Communist Manifesto?
May 17th, 2008 at 1:03 pm
ChrisM,
Please stop making us Canadians look like idiots…
Thanks,
TheCap
Budding Anthropologist
P.S. Thanks Mom424, Randall, and slickwilly. There is hope for the human Race yet!
May 17th, 2008 at 1:15 pm
So, I counted 7 books out of #2-9 that advocated or directly contributed to actual death, yet Darwin’s Black Box is #1?
Really????? Wow.
May 17th, 2008 at 1:30 pm
“The Tasty Treats From Häagen-Dazs Ice Cream” is missing from the list.
F**k Häagen-Dazs and it’s fat giving, sex repellant!
May 17th, 2008 at 1:34 pm
mom424:
Thanks mom. I hope someone does make the list that I requested.
Slickwilly are you a biologist? I’m really interested in becoming one, is it very difficult?
May 17th, 2008 at 1:35 pm
Eric: the list is in no particular order, read the whole thing.
May 17th, 2008 at 1:55 pm
Including Machiavelli is an interesting choice, I’m not sure it meets the technical requirement of being lies. But it certainly was influential.
I also have to question how Dr. Spocks book gets on there. Yes 20/20 hindsite had some bad information, but for the most part it did have a positive influence on parenting for several generations, while one of the greatest works of genocide of teh 20th Century, Rachel Carsons Silent Spring gets ignored? Spocks book may have had some bad info that may or may not have contributed to crib deaths. Carsons book used bogus science and outright lies to get everyone to mourn for the poor little birdies. The end result being MILLIONS dead or crippled of Malaria and Mosquito born dissease in the developing world. The effects of that one book are still being felt in health care systems throughout the world to this day.
May 17th, 2008 at 1:56 pm
I’m callin’ shenanigans on The Communist Manifesto.
It was a pamphlet, designed for the mid-1800s, and forced Western Europe to pay some respect to qualities beyond quantifiable greed. Marx believed in inevitable revolution; Lenin hijacked that, and every subsequent cruelty was based on similar warpings of the subject matter.
Seriously, it’s no worse than John Locke saying that a government that abuses its citizens doesn’t deserve to govern: a society that abuses its citizens doesn’t deserve to exist, either.
May 17th, 2008 at 1:57 pm
What about The Bell Curve by Richard J. Herrnstein and Charles Murray? It has encouraged all kinds of racist and policy and has been used to ‘legitimate’ many cruel policies. This may be one of the obvious books left out on purpose but, I thought I’d check.
May 17th, 2008 at 1:58 pm
I feel like the list-writer has an anti-liberal agenda, and is essentially trying to compare ideas like Nazism, racism, and creationism, with modern child-rearing, subjectivism, culturally sensitive education, and socialism.
May 17th, 2008 at 2:14 pm
WHAT ABOUT..IT”S THE GREAT PUMPKIN CHARLIE BROWN..?
May 17th, 2008 at 2:17 pm
To classify things as evil is silly. Read the Lucifer Principle.
That said, religious texts are created to indoctrinate, control, and provide a viewpoint and lifestyle that separates and elevates one group over another. Whether it is couched in doing ‘moral’ things, genocide and holy wars, or circumcision. If anything is evil, it is that.
May 17th, 2008 at 2:26 pm
Entertaining, but too slanted to be taken seriously (at least by us in the academic world) If criterion includes deaths as result of publication or negative influence, as implied by the baby book, where are the Bible and Koran? If it is based in the creation of tyranny, where’s Smith’s Wealth of Nations; and again, the Bible? Oh, and by the way Machiavelli wrote the Prince as a less than veiled attack against the Medici family who ruined his life.
May 17th, 2008 at 2:29 pm
has anyone here seen the movie “idocracy?” that right there is a pretty strong argument for eugenics… not in the racist sense that sanger means it, but in a more… intelligence-based sense.
i’m not going to whip out facts or anything like that, just talk from personal life experience:
i used to work for a company that provided services for mostly mentally handicapped people. just so you know, i loved those people, they were a joy to work with and i really enjoyed my job. however, their quality of life was abhorrent, and the toll they took on their parents and
caregivers (i’m talking about the people with severe disabilities) was almost unjustifiable. it’s great that modern medicine can save the lives of children who are born without a chance in hell… but you gotta think… there’s a reason babies like that died back in our savannah-roaming days. i’m not saying we should round up the ‘tards and kill ‘em, but maybe we should let nature take its course. i think it’d be better to not live than to not be able to participate the full mental extent of the human experience.
i know it’s controversial, but what are ya gonna do? most opinions are.
back to the idocracy thing: think about what a better world this would be if trash like britney spears and paris hilton weren’t allowed to procreate!
May 17th, 2008 at 2:32 pm
What authority does this article call on to so summarily criticize these works? While some of them are indeed controversial, none of them have “screwed up the world.” Some of the “facts” stated are actually falsehoods. It is interesting that the Bible, the Torah, and the Koran didn’t make the list. They are the seeds of the suffering and death of millions, which continues to this day.
May 17th, 2008 at 2:42 pm
Notice what all 326 posts so far have in common? This book did this, that book did that. Books are pieces of paper with squiggles on them. People DECIDE to make a book influential. People DECIDE to misuse the contents of a book to rationalize their impulses.
We’re surrounded by this mentality on every hand. The world will be a perfect place if only we can get rid of all the externalities that cause people to be mean. Because people never decide on their own to be mean. It’s guns, or spanking, or food additives, or poverty, or inequality, or pornography, or evolution or religion. So if we can eliminate all the evil externalities, everyone will be happy happy and there will be unicorns and rainbows and we can all go out and play forevermore.
The idyllic world John Lennon pictures in “Imagine” will last precisely up to the moment when two people want the same thing and neither is willing to back down. That’s a scary idea because it means there will always be conflict, there will always be a need for police and armies. Because even after you eliminate all the guns and spanking and poverty and violent cartoons, people will soon discover they can get power, privilege, and gratification from dominating others.
Ironically, trying to remove all the things that might cause people to choose evil ends up creating the worst tyrannies. Because it’s never enough. Regardless of how little inequality or poverty there is, people will still be discontented, and the causes of the discontent must be ferreted out ever more ruthlessly. Regardless of how much everyone subscribes to the same ideology or religion, there are always tiny differences that cause people to argue, so those will have to be stamped out.
It’s not the books that screwed up the world, it’s the people who read them. They could have chosen to draw other lessons from the books. They chose not to.
May 17th, 2008 at 2:58 pm
Your views of Machiavelli are asinine at best.
May 17th, 2008 at 3:05 pm
Wait, wait, what? What world do I live in when the guys defending Machiavelli get to call OTHER people asinine?
May 17th, 2008 at 3:32 pm
Add any book, speech or other utterance on Noam Chomsky. His untested, useless theories have destroyed American education. His concepts are the gateway drugs that have led to eubonics and many other nonsense efforts that are choking America’s attempt to educate its young. No single person has made America dumber than this idiot.
May 17th, 2008 at 4:40 pm
327. Erik J.D.
“Entertaining, but too slanted to be taken seriously”
Haha…yeah you could say that about a lot of lists on this site
May 17th, 2008 at 4:55 pm
All of the books on this list try to report an observation or a truth–warped, wrong, or evil as it may be to us now. Maybe the big problem has been in the inability of readers to take these books with a grain of salt. Funny how books which are patently fictional (’cept for Harry Potter, of course) haven’t made the list here.
May 17th, 2008 at 5:01 pm
Having Darwin’s Black Box on the list is intellectually dishonest. Especially having it as #1. The book has not been responsible for any death or destruction. It has not prompted a sea change in public policy or law. As near as I can tell, it’s just prompted some public debate. HOW HORRIBLE!
I’d say the same thing about any book from the current crop of atheists. I might vehemently disagree with what they say, but their books have not had a major impact on the world.
May 17th, 2008 at 5:23 pm
“Add any book, speech or other utterance on Noam Chomsky. His untested, useless theories have destroyed American education. His concepts are the gateway drugs that have led to eubonics and many other nonsense efforts that are choking America’s attempt to educate its young. No single person has made America dumber than this idiot.”
The fact that you just claimed “eubonics” is a word, somehow combining “eugenics” and “ebonics”, alone casts far more aspersions on your argument than logic alone. I do wonder, though, why you think hundreds of pages with books of citations make “America” (as if that’s the only important nation) makes people dumber than, say, asinine news reports or American Idol.
Gotta say, despite being completely in agreement with Darwin’s Black Box being STUPID, it in no way beats out Mein Kampf. And putting the Communist Manifesto past, y’know, Mein Kampf is also ridiculous. Ditto for putting Dewey (whether or not one agrees with him – I happen to) after Mein Kampf. Apparently people being “uneducated” is worse for the author than millions of people dying and the most devastating war in history, as well as the idea of banning inheritance. Hyperbole does not become the OP.
May 17th, 2008 at 5:28 pm
It is interesting that 4 of the writers on this list were admirers of Darwins theories. A book that has done no damage to anyone, and questions the theories behind so many atrocities of the last century gets on the list?
May 17th, 2008 at 5:44 pm
“Malleus Maleficarum (The Hammer of Witchraft) was a manual for witch hunters and judges to catch witches and stamp them out. It came out just prior to the protestant reformation and it was one of the most popular books amongst the reformers who were wanting to smash “evil” out of their countries.”
Considering that this book was published “just prior to the protestant reformation” (twenty editions were published between 1487 and 1520…Martin Luther was born in 1483 and published his 95 Theses in 1517), it’s interesting that it’s not referenced even one time in the foundational Lutheran (protestant) documents which defined the new movement: the Book of Concord, which was published in 1580. Luther himself died in 1546, and his most accomplished biographer, Roland Bainton, makes not a single reference to the Malleus Maleficarum in his book “Here I Stand” (which was published in 1950).
Could you please provide some substantiation for your charge that it was “one of the most popular books amongst the reformers”?
Thank you.
May 17th, 2008 at 5:54 pm
I have a response to those who are saying that the Bible belongs on this list.
If you consider all the absolute evil in the world a book has caused as a measure of whether it belongs on this list or not, the Bible actually WOULD be on this list, though below Hitler’s and Marx’s. And maybe Plato’s Republic as well. (Part of this is a consequence of being arguably the most read and nearly the oldest of all books).
However, if you consider NET evil rather than GROSS evil, the Bible is actually the least evil, most good text available. The overwhelming majority of all the good, charitable, kind acts that have gone on in the world and are going on in the world since Christ walk this earth is a direct result of his teachings which are largely contained in that book.
Those who are moved to act by the Bible and it’s ethics is the ultimate counter to the evil caused by the acts of Stalin and Marx and Hitler.
Wherever there is hunger or strife in this world or in this country, there are Christians who have led the way to ease the suffering of the poor, the downtrodden, the victims who are otherwise forgotten by the secular and non-Christian world.
May 17th, 2008 at 5:59 pm
I’d have included “The Population Bomb”, though it might be a bit redundant since you have Sanger there. And “Silent Spring” not only killed more people (via malaria by taking away DDT) than Spock, it created the dangerous trend of using basing draconian and deady public policy on what makes you feel Good About The Earth.
May 17th, 2008 at 6:06 pm
I have to agree with The Skin that Darwin belongs on the list. Margarget Sanger or Adolph Hitler probably never would have gotten off the ground without Darwin laying the groundwork for the idea that people are just animals to be bred and manipulated.
May 17th, 2008 at 6:20 pm
You forgot the bible and the koran
May 17th, 2008 at 6:38 pm
I tried to read Mein Kampf a couple of times, never to succeed in getting all the way through it. It was written in a rambling stream-of-thought literary style, and like many books of this nature, such as The Turner Diaries, or The Anarchist’s Cookbook, it might have benefited from competent editing, which authors like the 1925 Adolf Hitler could not possibly hope to convince to touch this kind of garbage. Word to the wise; if somebody pushes a cheaply-produced paperback that reads like it was written by a demented twelve year old child, with more typographical errors per page than your church newsletter, beware the movement that would produce it. That was Hitler’s state of mind in a nutshell.
May 17th, 2008 at 6:39 pm
Actually, no one really knows whether or not Margaret Mead’s book was based on truth or not. Most people in the anthropological community think she was probably not as stringent as she should have been, but I don’t know any cultural anthropologists who believe outright that the book is based on lies. The man who started the controversy, Derek Freeman, is well known for being totally mentally unstable, and he has very publicly made known his puritanical ideas about sexuality. When he re-interviewed the girls that Mead had originally worked with, it was over fifty years later, and they had all converted to Christianity. He waited until Mead died to publish his findings so she wouldn’t be able to reply. Obviously his books caused huge ripples in anthropology, but most people agree that he isn’t the most credible person, and based on Mead’s fieldnotes, it really isn’t possible to tell whether or not the book is accurate. Furthermore, it’s not as if it is such a crazy notion that youths in a society would engage in promiscuity openly. There are many societies, like the Trobrianders, who are known for this. People have just blindly accepted that it was a hoax because it is a good story, without even looking at the full picture. And the thing about the book being about her own sexual confusions was originally written by the National Catholic Register… not exactly the most unbiased source ever.
May 17th, 2008 at 7:54 pm
“It’s number One! It’s number One.” Asshats, It’s in no particular Order! I feel a rant about people being too lazy to read coming on.
This list has taught me one thing. We all have opinions, right and wrong, left and right, and some that left long ago.
____
‘Choices in life are rarely pure, but to understand the middle ground it is helpful to imagine the extremes.’ Peter Berger, I like that quote and I think is pretty relevant.
May 17th, 2008 at 8:43 pm
No one mentioned Ayn Rand? Or is she too obvious of a choice?
May 17th, 2008 at 9:54 pm
Mom424-
np
alright for folks to know there’s an admin around. damn sure have no issues w/ my age…totally freaks me out i’m still around after all this time…lol. as for partaking…i would if i could.
May 17th, 2008 at 10:02 pm
“I love how people will seize upon any chance to attack religion.”
I love how people will seize upon any moment where religion comes into question as an opportunity to paint religion as being under attack or somehow a victim.
May 17th, 2008 at 10:25 pm
As a witch, I’d like to thank you for having Malleus Maleficarum on the list. While the ignorant masses keep yelling about real religious texts being omitted from the list, they seem to forget that pseudo-religious texts, like Malleus, exist and do even more harm. The Bible did not induce The Burning Times, which was basically a 300 year Holocaust that hit more innocents than anything else, including Christians that were accused of “black magic” for the sake of land grabbing (in most US provinces/states during the 1800s, discovery of a witch and subsequent slaying [or the slaying of an individual and subsequent "discovery" of witchcraft] entitled the discoverer to the decease individual’s property).
The authors of Malleus asked the Pope at the time for his blessing on the publication of the book. Not only did he deny them, he forbade them from printing it. They ignored him and put the endorsement in the book anyway. Every superstition, myth, and fear that anyone has about Witchcraft comes from this horrid book, which was written with no regard to fact and completely from some demented fantasies. Near single-handedly, Malleus altered the course of Paganism for over one-half of a millennium, causing Witchcraft to become the second most slandered religion in the history of the world (Voudoun, more commonly spelled as Voodoo, is the reigning champion for that, with a significantly greater unmerited prejudice against it).
Say what you will of philosophy and science, but neither of them have caused 500 years of suppression, suffering, lynchings, fear, and hatred in any fashion that compares to Malleus Maleficarum.
May 17th, 2008 at 10:57 pm
No one mentioned Ayn Rand?
How have her books messed anything up unless you consider exposing the socialist elite agenda a BAD thing?!
May 17th, 2008 at 10:59 pm
Says Randall:
We have Dewey to thank for the discarding of substance in favor of process. And the result? Our kids are far behind Europeans and Asians in math and science, watch Hollywood movies in class in lieu of actual instruction, and security is a greater concern in our schools than education.
Says me:
Umm… Contrary to the popular opinion that Asian education is all facts and drill, Japanese educators use Dewey far more than Americans do. See Stigler & Hiebert, (1999) The Teaching Gap, or Becker & Shimada (1997) The open ended approach, for examples of how Dewey has influenced Japanese mathematics education.
May 17th, 2008 at 11:54 pm
You should’ve included, “Silent Spring.” Carson’s book has caused the deaths of thousands due to preventable disease.
May 18th, 2008 at 12:32 am
warningtreadonthis (#319):
Actually, I’m not a biologist, though a large part of what I do involves biological science. If you want to be a biologist though, if it really interests you, take up biology as a major in college and work hard so you can eventually make it to graduate and post-graduate degrees. Most professional biologists are phDs.
I’m actually a graduate student in the philosophy of science department at my university. My specific field is evolutionary psychology. I consider myself a psychologist, but the nature of the field requires a firm background in biology, particularly evolutionary theory. I probably could make a list on top 15 or 20 evidences for why evolution is the valid theory for explaining the diversity of life. The theory of evolution actually doesn’t deal with the origins of life, though the concepts of evolution are applied in the field that does (abiogenesis). It would take me a little while, though. I’ve been very busy this past week.
May 18th, 2008 at 12:39 am
Slick: Dude, I thought you were retired. I guess I should’ve paid more attention.
May 18th, 2008 at 12:55 am
Crimanon: Whoa, where the blue hell did you get that idea? LOL
May 18th, 2008 at 1:07 am
I think it came up in conversation, but really I have no clue, Failing memory. If Only i’d listened in DARE. What can you do? oh.. you going to smoke that?
Strange question, Snow Crash; Radikal Kourier Systems; Does any one know where I can find a Bionic Radish decal?
May 18th, 2008 at 1:15 am
Alright, call it devils advocate or horrible facist, I think some things need to be said, since, this entire article is written on the presumption it can dictate cause and effect. Not everything is all bad.
I am unfamiliar with Mead’s works.
Malleus Maleficarum – the Witch Hunts were bad, but like all bad things they were a catalyst for something more. In America, they started the Massachusetts Bay colony down the road to due process, directly because of the Salem witch trials (specifically, the mandate that spectral evidence is bunk).
The Prince – The Prince is simply a manual on how to be a tyrant, it didn’t create it. Nor would not being familiar with it prevent one from becoming one, much in the same way that not reading “First Grade Basic Math 7th Edition” prevents someone from realizing that five is more than three. Machiavelli also said many things in his book, such as “The Greatest shield [a Prince] can have is the love of his people”. Funny how people overlook those passages.
Mein Kampf – Hitler didn’t create Jewish hatred. He simply tapped into a pool of resentment that hadn’t been tried before in a real national scale. Also, the word they like to teach us these days is that 1 in 10 Germans was a Nazi, they were a tiny minority. Right? So it wasn’t really all that effective. Further: Mein Kampf is what alerted the outside world to what Nazism was really all about. It’s what made Winston Churchill such a Cassandra during the course of the 1930s. If Mein Kampf wasn’t there, would -anyone- have been prepared for the coming war?
Pivot of Civilization: Maybe. But we’re only a couple decades away from designer babies. It will come, brave new world that it is, it will come.
Democracy and Education – Hard to disagree on any point therein, when 14% of adult Americans can’t find their own country on a globe (might be higher now).
Spock’s works influenced the baby boomers, the bane of all civilization. Good riddance to him too.
Protocols: I don’t believe the some one half of westerners who believe in some form of the Zionist conspiracy (you know, the ones who think Israel (some 5 million people) are holding the Arab middle east hostage (some 500 million) even though they are still technically in a state of war with almost all of them). Though this book definitely had a role to play. But it does not count for the fact that Iran’s government schooling teaches gorillas descended from Jews.
Manifesto of the Communist Party – I have not read Marx, I’ve been far too lazy, being of the post-cold war generation. But from what anecdotal information I’ve read in other sources, it simply seems like a rallying point. If Marx hadn’t been published, the Russian Reds would have used a different name for the same rooster.
Darwin’s Black Box – I have not read it. But this slot could be put to better use. If you honestly believe the REAL fundamentalists need more than the King James Bible to argue with science, you’re either very optimistic, or misinformed At least, I hope it was only fundamentalists you were targetting. Science in general has plenty to be beat on from an academic’s point of view (like the term “statistical anomaly” and everything you can associate to that).
May 18th, 2008 at 3:53 am
Slickwilly: I look forward to it
May 18th, 2008 at 6:25 am
I am not surprised that the publishers of this list have no idea of the sutras and bhashyas of ancient times. Machiavelli’s Prince is a very mild mannered treatise compared to the much older and vastly superior Arthashastra attributed to Kautilya aka Vishnugupta aka Chanakya, who is undoubtedly the foremost political philosopher of all time. As a professor from Occidental College puts it, Machiavelli was a genial poodle before the rottweiler Chanakya. The Arthashastra (possibly a compilation of the knowledge of a 1000 years documented around 500 BCE) alongwith the ancien Tamizh classic Tirukkural of Tiruvalluvar are among arguably the most important ethical treatises of all times. The Indian view of ethics is highly empirical, although it sounds paradoxical, and coming as I do from that tradition I find this harrumphing, hemming and hawing by ill-read ignoramuses like the creationist fundamentalist Benjamin Wiker, puerile and even stupid. The world isn’t what we want it to be. Just get used to it. Btw Michael Behe’s book is th emost apt selection for this list
May 18th, 2008 at 7:39 am
@62
Being a recent product of the Education system of America I would have to say that the majority of your claims are false in this posting. I was lucky enough to attend a private High School where a large focus was “how to think.” The majority of our exams consisted of multi-tiered questions that required a well-thought out and well-written answer that fit into the framework of what we were taught in the classes. Everything except our Math classes used at least some of this format.
After graduating and heading to college I was shocked at what passed for examination. Roughly 80% of the tests I ever took to earn my Bachelors were multiple choice. Granted this may have been an isolated event at my particular school but I can’t help but think that it reflects the broader attitude of the American School system.
Sadly, that attitude isn’t about getting the students excited about learning new things, it’s about grades. Grades are the driving factor in today’s school system because grades are important for teacher reviews as well as school funding. If certain criteria isn’t met in the form of a standardized test then the school loses money. I know this because my mother has been a teacher for upwards of the last 20 years.
I still tell people that my High School education (Jesuit just like my college) was leaps and bounds far more valuable than my degree due to its overall impact on how I think. The only reason I didn’t drop out of college to save money was to prove I could do it to my future employers and to be able to say “I have a degree”.
Keep in mind I’m not saying facts are irrelevant, but the ability to find and understand the facts, seeing how those independent nuggets of knowledge fit into the whole of history, biology or whatever, that is truly the difference maker between being a corporate drone or having a vision and pursuing it on your own terms.
May 18th, 2008 at 8:15 am
SlickWilly; When you get a moment could you explain what disciplines your field covers. Evolutionary psychology sounds fascinating. It covers the whys and wherefores for the development of empathy, love, etc. etc.? Does it deal with the specific hormones, ie; physical/chemical reactions that cause/result from those feelings and how they developed? or is it more general than that, about how society has changed since cave-man days?
Could you spill the details please. Also could you provide a good introductory piece for me to read. And its ok if its in PHD speak, that really isn’t an issue for me. (My asking for clarification on the last debate was not for my benefit; sometimes you scholars get bogged down in minutae; lose the forest for the trees)
May 18th, 2008 at 8:27 am
Landrii; you went to a private school. You had the best teachers – the best teachers teach both ways – some things are best learned by rote, others by discovery. Public schools do not always get the best teachers. Entirely chucking standards allowed the crappy teachers to sail through without educating their students properly. The standardized testing is a back-lash from this. We have the same thing in Ontario now; literacy exams that must be passed in order to graduate, standardized testing in Grs. 3, 6, 9, as well as the above mentioned literacy test in Gr. 10.
Personally, I think education would be better served by testing the teachers. Here, once you get your ticket, its yours for life. You pretty much have to assault a student, have sex with a student, or otherwise misbehave to lose your license. New schools have it a little better; the principal gets to choose, via interviews, who they hire. Of course providing he/she is a good administrator and doesn’t just pick the folks he/she likes.
Always the best students are the product of the best teachers.
May 18th, 2008 at 9:34 am
Interesting list and like many others that have commented on it’s content, I take it that religion was not included. There are a couple of books I would have included since in the recorded history of mankind more people have died in the name of god than for any other reason.
May 18th, 2008 at 1:20 pm
This list was almost total and utter rubbish.
May 18th, 2008 at 1:46 pm
’someone’ got dropped on their head as a child
May 18th, 2008 at 2:17 pm
Here’s one I think people may have overlooked: Dianetics. A religious cult in which it is espoused that doctors, who study the human form for the better part of a decade or more, don’t know what’s best for you physically and psychologically, is preposterous. The book has led several people to eschew any kind of medical help, in hopes that they can attain what amount to fantasy story superpowers.
May 18th, 2008 at 2:25 pm
Someone: it would be more beneficial if you elaborated on why you felt it was “almost total and utter rubbish”. It is fine to disagree with the lists. It is even better to explain your view on it.
May 18th, 2008 at 2:46 pm
Wot the hell??? None of these books have any pictures. Howz a Texan supposed to read ‘em?
May 18th, 2008 at 4:53 pm
Mom:
I’d be glad to when I get a few minutes to sit down and do it. I understand about why you asked for the clarification, sorry if it came off as condescending, that was not my intention.
May 18th, 2008 at 6:45 pm
like you all haven’t cast a stone.
or are you all whores?
May 18th, 2008 at 8:27 pm
was expecting more religious books, good to see a list like this.
May 18th, 2008 at 9:49 pm
Great and really interesting list. The Bible should be #1 in my opinion, maybe followed by the Koran (?)
May 18th, 2008 at 9:49 pm
Eric J.D. #327. To what part of the academic world do you belong & who are the us you refer to ?
May 18th, 2008 at 11:06 pm
No sir, I don’t like it.
May 18th, 2008 at 11:38 pm
If you’re gonna blame religion and say that the religious books are also the source of all the worlds ills and as one said “killed millions of people over the past few hundred years” you might want to you know, actually do some research on the topic? How bout some real numbers?
If you take the total number casualties of religious actions for example the crusades, witch burning, the inquisition, etc. pre-dating the 20th century, all the way back to 30 B.C all the way to 1899 you get a grand total of 1,650,000 (obviously not a precise number but backed up by the best in historical research). If you take only the number of casualties caused by atheist regimes in the 20th century, just from the year 1900 to the year 2000 you get 107,047,000.
So with the lions share of recorded history religious killings don’t even make 2% of the deaths that can be for certain attributed to atheist regimes. Blaming the Koran and the Bible for all the worlds ills is probably really comforting but the reality is that even in strictly godless countries there are still wars and genocide. Beyond that the originality of this list is amazing. Reminds me of a book I read titled “10 books that screwed up the world:And five that probably didn’t help.” By Benjamin Wiker. Weird thing too is that it’s practically the same list in the book and crazy enough even the reasons are the same word for word. That’s one hell of a coincidence.
*Statistics taken from the “Encyclopedia of War”
May 19th, 2008 at 12:22 am
The writer of this list has plagiarised the concept, title and half of the ideas from a real book entitled “10 Books That Screwed Up the World: And 5 Others That Didn’t Help” by Benjamin Wiker. You can find the scholarly work by this name on Amazon. Needless to say this list is not there. What a loser! But then, originality is not required when you write a list for the sole purpose of putting down one recent book you disagree with (and evidenced by your comment have not read, either).
May 19th, 2008 at 1:04 am
I found the last bit about spock the most interesting… “Previously, experts had told parents that babies needed to learn to sleep on a regular schedule, and that picking them up and holding them whenever they cried would only teach them to cry more and not to sleep through the night. Spock taught the exact opposite.” The thought that babies need to learn to sleep through the night is a bit ridiculous. As babies we form attachments to our caregivers and these attachments can have a profound effect on our socialization later in life. When a mother answers her child’s cries she is letting him or her know that she will be there when the child needs it. Consistent and loving attention given to babies when they cry builds secure attachment and a secure attachment to a caregiver generally leads to greater autonomy and better adaptation skills in the future.
May 19th, 2008 at 1:08 am
oh, how i wish people would stop using CAPS! would be even better if people would read not only the text of the list in its entirety but the comments before commenting, especially when accusing anyone of plagarism. ..an issue previously covered in earlier comments.
May 19th, 2008 at 1:12 am
It should not surprise anyone if the list reflects the bises of its authors. Bringing the Malleus without demonstrated good reason in connection with the church reformers points to a catholic’s desire to feel better about his faith. After all, it was the catholic church’s widespread but diverging practice of hunting witches and heretics that made the standardization of the practice and, thus, the book necessary and consequently a bestseller.
What the short description of the Malleus also fails to mention is the fact that it is based on and justified by christian teachings. Rather than listing the real culprit of medieval and late medieval religious atrocities, namely the bible proper, the authors chose the Malleus, from which he hoped to disassociate himself by the flimsy reference to the reformation.
Don’t get me wrong; I’m not defending the reformers. There is hardly any nastier antisemitsm and racial hatred than in Martin Luther treatise “On The Jews And Their Lies”. The list author probably didn’t know about this xian jewel which Hitler, although himself a lifelong catholic, used to stir up anti-Jewish sentiments. For that reason alone at least that particular Luther work should have made the list.
But then we would have to admit that Hitler in his persecution of the Jews was motivated by his christian beliefs. In keeping, the article about “Mein Kampf” makes no mention of Hitler’s frequent appeals to christian tenets.
Mere accidental omissions?
May 19th, 2008 at 2:10 am
Addendum to comment #380
The authors of Malleus Maleficarum, Sprenger and Kramer, were both Dominican friars and Inquisitors. See, among other places
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malleus_maleficarum
In case somebody has doubts about the nazi-christian connection, please enjoy the photographs at
http://www.nobeliefs.com/nazis.htm
To check up on the father of all protestants Martin Luther’s vitriol against Jews incl. the connection to the nazis go to
http://www.nobeliefs.com/luther.htm
Walter H.
May 19th, 2008 at 3:07 am
Walter: I have not omitted things intentionally – in fact if there is an agenda, it seems you are the one with it – I described the books as much as was needed – it was less a list on the motivation of the writers than a list of the consequences. I am certainly not intentionally leaving things out. You will find Luther’s “against the Jews” mentioned on another list.
May 19th, 2008 at 4:21 am
To say something as ignorant as Behe promoting a literal interpretation of the Book of Genesis in Darwin’s Black Box only tells me that the book was never read by the lister. They run the track well with the first nine books then misses the curve and runs off through the woods.
May 19th, 2008 at 5:38 am
It’s a list trying not to offend.
“The Koran” and “The Bible” would have to be the top 2 by a country mile. By a billion country miles. Followed distantly in third by Darwin’s “The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection”.
May 19th, 2008 at 8:27 am
Walter, are you arguing that this list has a Christian bias? It appears to me that nothing could be further from the truth.
For one thing (among many), jfrater has admitted that he deliberately copied from the publicity materials for Benjamin Wiker’s book with the same title, yet gave Dr. Wiker and his publisher no credit. If he (jfrater) went out of his way to avoid promoting a Christian book, does it seem likely that he’s trying to promote any kind of Christian agenda?
Frankly, if jfrater is truly trying to stand against dishonesty — and argue that intelligent design advocates have a monopoly on that vice nowadays — he has a most peculiar way of doing it.
May 19th, 2008 at 8:55 am
Ben Wiker scholarly? Ok the moon is made of green cheese. The horrors of the 15th-19th centuries, slavery, extermination of native peoples, and the Victrorian Holocausts were all religiously inspired. The 2oth century holocausts too are all religious – as in the sense of being doctrinal. This is apart from the fact that the Nazis, Italian Fascists, and not to forget the world’s most popular and socially acceptable post WW2 Fascist Franco, were all religiously inspired. Behe’s of course is a creationist, just of a different variety.
May 19th, 2008 at 9:10 am
One little issue. Planned Prenthood does not try to distance themselves from Sanger. In very Orwellian fashion they just pretend tht all of that horrific stuff Sanger promoted and the fact she palled around and gave speeches at Klan raliies just never happened. So much do they not distance themselves from her, they in fact honor someone every year with an awared bearing her name. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EIN/is_2001_March_30/ai_72528153
May 19th, 2008 at 9:37 am
DaRook: You are incorrect and have obviously failed to read either the description under the list or the following comments. The description plainly says that the book has been used by christian fundamentalists to *fuel* creationist ideology that derives itself from a literal interpretation of Genesis, not because Behe himself ascribes to a literal interpretation of genesis. By the way, you are also about the 20th person to point this out – and be corrected – in the course of the comments on this list, meaning you obviously didn’t bother to follow the conversation either. Let’s get with the program, huh?
May 19th, 2008 at 10:10 am
A book against evolution screws up the world more than Mein Kampf? Seriously? I think that people being confused about evolution/creation is hardly earth-shaking.
May 19th, 2008 at 11:24 am
I would not include Mead’s “Coming of Age In Samoa”, because the book was simply not a huge influence, much less a harmful influence, unless you hold to the idea that any promotion of cross-cultural comparison is always bad.
Sanger’s book, “The pivot of civilization”, is often maligned by the terrorists of the religious right, who never actually quote from it without altering the original text. The book says nothing about euthenasia of the feeble among us. It advocates only birth control — preventing pregancies in populations who can’t afford to have large families. If you actually read this book, which most people haven’t (I have), you will see that clearly, Sanger advocates the idea that there are too many extremely poor people who have very large families, which they cannot afford to provide adequate care for, and this lack of resources to feed, cloth, and provide healthcare, leads to conditions that breed disease and birth defects.
Sanger did not advocate the type of Eugenics that the Nazis came up with. IN fact, she opposed it fiercely. Her form of Eugenics did not target any group of people based on ethnicity. She argued that poor families should have fewer children, and should use birth control, so that the few children they have would actually be healthy ones. There are thousands of Christian Fundamentalist web sites which have anti-Sanger propaganda on them, and they drown out the actual facts about her and her book.
Behe’s book, “Darwin’s Black Box” has had almost no effect on the world compared to Mein Kempf or The Communist Manifesto. It’s a laughable book, and generally reguarded as a the work of a crackpot. Sure — fundamentalists hold it in high reguard, but it’s only one out of hundreds of pathetic creationist books that preach the same littany of complaints. It has so far not had much influence at all over American society. It’s merely given people something to laugh at.
The rest of the list is pretty good, th
May 19th, 2008 at 12:55 pm
You forgot one: The Bible.
May 19th, 2008 at 1:06 pm
Though referenced a few times in the comments, I feel compelled to challenge your justification for including “The Communist Manifesto” on the list—claiming: “it could win the award for the most malicious book ever written.”
While I certainly agree the book deserves inclusion, on what grounds can you possibly assert it as the most malicious book ever written? The term “malicious” *exclusively* evaluates one’s intentionality—denoting an intention to harm. While you may disagree with their idealistic political philosophy (or the potential for Communism, in practice, to lead to positive social consequences), the intentions of Marx and Engels in writing the manifesto were unequivocally to improve society by eliminating class distinctions.
If “The Communist Manifesto” is one of the most malicious books ever written, then you’ve implied that Marx and Engels *deliberately* posited spurious arguments (that would appear valid and compelling in theory) with the surreptitious intent to cause societal harm when enacted. And, obviously, there’s no evidence to suggest that their intentions were anything but, perhaps, naively idealistic.
Michael
May 19th, 2008 at 1:58 pm
” If you were in a dark alley and you saw several large men heading toward you, would you be a little relieved to know that they were just leaving from their weekly bible study?”
To paraphrase Hitchens: I would in Belfast. Or Serbia.
May 19th, 2008 at 1:59 pm
Grrrr. ..wouldn’t be relieved…
May 19th, 2008 at 2:14 pm
Mom424 and anyone else who is interested:
Evolutionary psychology is a theoretical approach to psychology that presupposes that there are universal, cross-cultural thought processes and behavioral patterns among humans, and that the only sufficient mechanism to explain the development and proliferation of these processes and patterns is evolution. The science of evolutionary psychology requires interdiscliplinary training in the fields of biology, psychology, anthropology, paleoarcheaology, geology, ecology, zoology, statistics, and computer science. (There has a bit of controversy in the past as to how much hard science is actually involved in evolutionary psychology, which I will address shortly.) It is an offshoot of a branch of biology called “sociobiology,” a field that was first truly explored by a very big name in the modern evolutionary synthesis (no longer called Darwinism, which is a misleading term to many non-evolutionists, now functionally referred to as “Neo-darwinism”), E. O. Wilson. Sociobiology is essentially the precursor to modern evolutionary psychology, with one fundamental difference that I will address in just a moment.
There are essentially five main postulates that serve as the basis for evolutionary psychology, attributed to eminent evolutionary psychologist David Buss.
1. Observable behavior results from underlying psychological mechanisms (characterized as process-specific cognitive devices hardwired into the brain) and their interaction with sensational input (incoming information acquired through the five main senses) and cognitive input (incoming information acquired through internal references; i.e. self-initiated ideas).
2. Evolution is the only natural process that account for the diversity and complexity of life.
3. Evolved psychological mechanisms are functionally specific in nature; that is, they evolved to deal with specific adaptive challenges. (This is the rift between evolutionary psychology and sociobiology – EP places an emphasis on specific adaptive problems as the motivator for the rise of these psychological characteristics, while sociobiology places an emphasis on general adaptive problems; essentially, evolutionary psychologists believe that psychological adaptations evolved distinctly to deal with specific problems in day-to-day survival of early humans, while sociobiologists believe psychological adaptations evolved as broad, sweeping heuristics that allow flexibility of adaptation.)
4. Evolution, via natural selection, designed these psychological adaptations to respond to specific stimuli in the environment (further outlining the rift above).
5. Human psychology is essentially comprised of a large number of these process-specific, context-specific psychological mechanisms that are accessed in conjunction with one another on a subconscious level, and interact with sensational and cognitive input, leading to observable behavior.
The short version of this is: Human behavior can be thought of as the result of a bunch of different, subconscious learning and response patterns as they are constantly pitted against conscious thoughts and ideas, and the only physical explanation for the presence of these learning and response patterns is evolution.
Unlike sociobiology, evolutionary psychology tends to place a direct emphasis on the evolution of the organism rather than the evolution of socie