3 ms·

> If we judged all the many enormously influential and sometimes celebrated figures of civilization's history by modern moral standards, there would be virtuall

> If we judged all the many enormously influential and sometimes celebrated figures of civilization's history by modern moral standards, there would be virtually none left to applaud who were born before the 1960s. Good! We have a major issue with hero worship in our society. We should not be naming anything after anyone. It serves no purpose other than to create cults of personality.

chatoyance 5y ago
[dead]
pvaldes 5y ago
> We should not be naming anything after anyone. It serves no purpose other than to create cults of personality. To inspire the new generations to work hard to move our societies further is a basic goal in any schools and has proven to be a really profitable move for everybody. On the other way, falsely accusing main scientists of "the sin of the jour" is harming deliberately the trust of the new generations in knowledge and any school doing that should close ASAP. Linnaeus was as racist as me or you. His real sins were much, much worse. 1) placing people among monkeys in the order Primates. Religious people are trying to disprove that without any success for more than 250 years. Yes we all are "monkeys" and chimps are our closest alive relative in the planet. Linnaeus was right. Deal with it. 2) Exploring the logical possibility that if a genus can include more than one species, our genus could do the same also. And he was right also in this. The genus Homo includes more than one species. Period. This is not debatable or unclear and is not racism. Is the naked uncomfortable truth that will make your life much more complicated if your goal is to promote a Creationist agenda. Of course he was wrong with the species proposed, but before to blaming him we should remember that genetic analysis were not available in 1768. And he still somehow managed to find the right answer in thousands of cases without knowing anything about the DNA. And this is really impressive if we think about it. People being racist or more and more stupid with time and some obscure agents promoting "cancel knowledge" is not Linnaeus fault in any way.

chatoyance 5y ago

[dead]

pvaldes 5y ago

> We should not be naming anything after anyone. It serves no purpose other than to create cults of personality. To inspire the new generations to work hard to move our societies further is a basic goal in any schools and has proven to be a really profitable move for everybody. On the other way, falsely accusing main scientists of "the sin of the jour" is harming deliberately the trust of the new generations in knowledge and any school doing that should close ASAP. Linnaeus was as racist as me or you. His real sins were much, much worse. 1) placing people among monkeys in the order Primates. Religious people are trying to disprove that without any success for more than 250 years. Yes we all are "monkeys" and chimps are our closest alive relative in the planet. Linnaeus was right. Deal with it. 2) Exploring the logical possibility that if a genus can include more than one species, our genus could do the same also. And he was right also in this. The genus Homo includes more than one species. Period. This is not debatable or unclear and is not racism. Is the naked uncomfortable truth that will make your life much more complicated if your goal is to promote a Creationist agenda. Of course he was wrong with the species proposed, but before to blaming him we should remember that genetic analysis were not available in 1768. And he still somehow managed to find the right answer in thousands of cases without knowing anything about the DNA. And this is really impressive if we think about it. People being racist or more and more stupid with time and some obscure agents promoting "cancel knowledge" is not Linnaeus fault in any way.