3 ms·
> At least it is not outright racist (savages vs civilised is not PC, but not "inferior race type thinking) - although he is in other writing. Nice try, but th
by bdjsiqoocwk 3y ago
> At least it is not outright racist (savages vs civilised is not PC, but not "inferior race type thinking) - although he is in other writing.
Nice try, but the fact that he uses "civilized" and "savages" in the context of natural selection suggests he believes their condition can't be changed by training or education.
I'm other words, calling it savages was probably the PC way of the time to refer to inferior people.
- graemep 3y agoNo, not in this particular passage. Darwin was racist as was usual in his time (Wallace was not) but in this case he is talking about culture, not ancestry. Where he is wrong is that "savages" also look after the weak. There is even evidence that hominids earlier than modern humans looked after the weak. > I'm other words, calling it savages was probably the PC way of the time to refer to inferior people. They were not bothered about being PC at the time. He would not have hesitated to say inferior.