If Nazism is Genetic
- Thread starter Animekitty
- Start date
Politicians that supporter Henry Kissinger
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pK-NNi43JjA"]YouTube - Kissinger: A free war criminal[/ame]
It wasn't?
Anyway, I find it hard to believe that -isms of this kind are genetic. They might be mutually shared within a family, community, even a country, but I don't think they originate from genes. There are probably a lot more factors than sheer genetic influence that leads one to walk down the path of an -ism.
I might be biased, though, since I generally dislike -isms.
An inclination to be prejudice against people who are different may well be genetic but specifically Nazism? No chance.
- Nov 12, 2008
- 14,153
- 1,334
- 0
- MBTI
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- 1w2 sx/so/sp
This
And this.
There is no way that a political ideal is in any way genetic. Of course personality traits can be inherited to a weak degreee, and certain personality traits can have potential for certain things. However, all of these are so loosely connected that there is simply no way it is scientifically possible.
What made you ask this question and did you seriously think you'd get any response other than the ones you got?
Also, Hitler is a Jew. I hate racism and minorities.
Oxymoronic paradoxes arise from theorizing simultaneously about people and their own theories about people. For example: only inferior/superior/ people (don't) believe in the existence of inferior and superior people. If someone believes everyone is good, they have no way to tell that someone is bad for believing that some people are bad, and if the latter person has no other way to comprehend incorrectness, except through personification, it becomes (seemingly) impossible to convey meaning to them.
If a scientist studies people and finds out that some of them are indeed genetically redundant, if that's even logically possible, but then he also finds out he belongs to the same misfortunate group himself. Would the scientist then conclude that his own conclusion must have been flawed, because he's one of the flawed-thinking people?
Oxymoronic paradoxes arise from theorizing simultaneously about people and their own theories about people. For example: only inferior/superior/ people (don't) believe in the existence of inferior and superior people. If someone believes everyone is good, they have no way to tell that someone is bad for believing that some people are bad, and if the latter person has no other way to comprehend incorrectness, except through personification, it becomes (seemingly) impossible to convey meaning to them.
If a scientist studies people and finds out that some of them are indeed genetically redundant, if that's even logically possible, but then he also finds out he belongs to the same misfortunate group himself. Would the scientist then conclude that his own conclusion must have been flawed, because he's one of the flawed-thinking people?
Last edited: