موت الإنسانية

by Richard Weikart, نايف الملا (translator)

Do you believe human life is inherently valuable? Unfortunately, in the secularized age of state-sanctioned euthanasia and abortion-on-demand, many are losing faith in the simple value of human life. To the disillusioned, human beings are a cosmic accident whose intrinsic value is worth no more than other animals.

The Death of Humanity explores our culture's declining respect for the sanctity of human life, drawing on philosophy and history to reveal the dark road ahead for society if we lose our faith in human life.

Genres: Philosophy, Science, Religion, Politics, Nonfiction

352 pages, Paperback

First published April 18, 2016

About the author

Dr. Weikart is Professor of History at California State University, Stanislaus, and Fellow at the Center for Science and Culture of Discovery Institute, Seattle.

He completed his Ph.D. in modern European history at the University of Iowa in 1994, receiving the biennial prize of the Forum for History of Human Sciences for the best dissertation in that field. His revised dissertation, Socialist Darwinism: Evolution in German Socialist Thought from Marx to Bernstein, was published in 1999.

His book, From Darwin to Hitler: Evolutionary Ethics, Eugenics, and Racism in Germany, documents the influence of naturalistic evolution on ethical thought, euthanasia, militarism, and racism—and ultimately Hitler's ideology.

With an extensive background in modern German and modern European intellectual history, he has published articles in journals such as Isis, Journal of the History of Ideas, German Studies Review, History of European Ideas, European Legacy, and Fides et Historia. One such article received the Selma V. Forkosch Prize for the best article in 1993 in the Journal of the History of Ideas.

Articles by Richard Weikart

Reviews

[نجد · Rating 4 out of 5]

يتحدث الكتاب عن تراجع المفاهيم الدينية التي تعلي من قداسة الروح البشرية منذ عصر التنوير الى عصرنا الحالي الذي برزت فيه نتائج تسلل المفاهيم المادية للحقول الأخلاقية والقانونية والفلسفية .. وبعض النتائج وصلت درجة التشكيك في قيمة حياة الإنسان -من ذلك دعاوى طلب المساواة بين البهائم والبشر :)-، ويستعرض الكتاب عدة مجالات أثّر هذا الأمر عليها من بينها الإجهاض والقتل الرحيم والانتخاب الطبيعي والحتمية البيولوجية.

مما ورد في الكتاب:

١- عالم الأحياء (إيريك بيانكا eric pianka) ألقى كلمة صادمة بمناسبة رسمية عِلميّة إذ ذكر أن البشر ليسوا أفضل من البكتيريا.

٢- كثيرٌ ممن يتبنون قناعات تحتقر حياة البشر لا ينتهي بهم الأمر فعلياً للإضرار بالآخرين، ولكن يوجد من يتابعون قناعاتهم حتى يصلوا إلى ما تستلزمه من نتائج منطقية، وضرب المؤلف لذلك عدة أمثلة منها سفّاحون متأثرون بنظرية التطور، وبعضهم نشر قناعاته بأن الانتخاب الطبيعي لا بد أن يعود بحيث يدافع كل واحدٍ عن نفسه، وكان بعضهم يسمّي نفسه -المُنتخِب الطبيعي- مثل (pekka eric auvinen) الذي قام بارتكب مجزرة جماعية وبرّر فعله ببيانٍ يعكس معتقداته.

٣- إن أحد الأسباب التي مهدت للنازيين القيام بمجازرهم انطباعات و جوّ عام سابق للحكم النازي، فقبل عقود من الحكم النازي كان يؤكد كثير من الأطباء الألمان والاطباء النفسيون وأساتذة الطب في الجامعات على أن بعض الناس لا يستحقون الحياة! وضرب المؤلف عدة أمثلة على هؤلاء الأطباء والأساتذة وأطروحاتهم المادية الداعية للتخلص من المعاقين والمتخلفين عقلياً، لقد مهدت هذه الانطباعات ووجهات النظر الطريق والمنحدر الزلق لارتكاب جرائم النازية.

٤- لقد كانت الحتمية البيولوجية والتي تعني أن الوراثة أو الجينات لا تقوم فقط بتحديد الصفات الجسدية والعقلية، بل تحدد أيضاً السلوك والشخصية الأخلاقية، فوفقاً للأيديلوجيا النازية الصفات الإيجابية والسلبية مترسخة بيولوجياً والعرق الآري يحمل الإيجابية بينما الأعراق الأخرى تميل بطبيعتها الوراثية للسلوك السيء، لذلك أبادوا من يحملون "صفات وراثية سيئة" بهدف عمل هندسة بيولوجية للعرق البشري لتحسين الصفات الأخلاقية فيه.

٥- اعتمد مارتن لوثر كنغ على الفهم اليهودي-المسيحي للمساواة والأخلاق في رفضه للقوانين الظالمة.

٦- كان كانط يرفض فلسفة الحقوق الطبيعية وحقوق الإنسان والمساواة بين البشر بصفتها خيالات ميتافيزيقية، وقد اعترف في كتابه "الفلسفة الوضعية" بأن رفضه للإله قد أضعف الفكرة التي تقول أن البشر مميزون بطريقةٍ ما.

٧- يوجد في الغرب شركات تقدم فحوصات تشخيصية لما قبل الولادة، ولو فشلت هذه الشركات في اكتشاف العيوب الجينية فإنه يحق للآباء والأمهات رفع قضايا عليهم استناداً على مادة -ولادة غير عادلة wrongfull birth- وضرب المؤلف مثالاً على ذلك بزوجين من ولاية أوريغون وُلِد لهما طفل بمتلازمة داون عام ٢٠١٢ فحُكِم لهما بتعويض يقارب ٣ ملايين دولار وأكّدت لجنة التحكيم بشكل مخزٍ إجماعاً بأنه لم يكن ينبغي للطفل أن يُولَد !

٨- بعض علماء الأحياء الاجتماعية وعلماء النفس التطوري حاولوا تفسير الدين كسلوك مبني على أصل بيولوجي وأنه تطور ليساعدنا على البقاء والتكاثر بشكل أفضل، بل وقد بحث بعض علماء الوراثة عن "جين الإله" ولو كان هذا الجين موجوداً لكان كل البشر متدينين، بل عدد قليل من الأطفال الذين تمت تربيتهم بواسطة ملحدين يبقون متمسكين بالإلحاد إذ تشير بعض الإحصاءات إلى أن ٣٠٪؜ فقط من الأطفال الذين نشأوا على الإلحاد يبقون ملحدين عندما يكبرون.

٩- بالمقارنة، خلال القرن الذي سبق الثورة البلشفية بأكمله، القياصرة قاموا بإعدام ٧ آلاف شخص بسبب المعارضة السياسية، مقارنةً بمئات الآلاف من الإعدامات للمعارضة السياسية خلال فترة حكم لينين.

١٠- حكم مفكرون بريطانيون وأمريكيون أثناء الحرب العالمية الأولى وبعدها بأن نيتشه والوجودية كانتا أحد العوامل الفكرية المساهمة في الموت والدمار والوحشية والمحرِّضة على الحرب، وفي الكون النيتشوي حياة البشر ليس لها أي أهمية فالكون فارغٌ من الأخلاق ولذا فكل شيء يصبح جائزاً -ويدخل في هذا الظلم والعنف والقتل-، ولا يقف الأمر عند إجازة هذه الأفعال بل يتعدى ذلك إلى التشجيع عليها فقد كان نيتشه يبتهج بالظلم والموت.

١١- منذ سمحت بلجيكا قانونياً ب(الإنتحار بمساعدة طبيب) عام ٢٠٠٢ وأعداد المتقدمين لإنهاء حياتهم عبر القتل الرحيم في زيادة مضطردة !

..

الكتاب موضوعه فريدٌ من نوعه، لكن يعيبه قليلاً الإسهاب
تم بحمد الله .. رمضان ١٤٤٣ هـ

[Heather · Rating 5 out of 5]

(This review is cross-posted on Amazon.com)
Ideas have consequences. What is born in the academy, accepted by the intellegensia, and cultivated in the press will make its way into the popular culture. Philosophies that reduce man* to a mere machine or to just another animal rob him of his dignity. Philosophies that claim people are a product of their genetics or up-bringing, rob him of his free will. Philosophies that claim man’s motivations are nothing more than an insatiable pursuit of pleasure or power, rob him of any ultimate meaning in life. These philosophies, grounded in materialism, were born of radical Enlightenment notions that deny the existence of God and forgo the Judeo-Christian view that man has intrinsic moral worth because he is made in God’s image.

The result, if followed to its logical end, is a culture that is both paranoid of and obsessed with death. Richard Weikart’s book Death of Humanity (2016, Regnery Publishing) traces how various Enlightenment philosophies have found their way into popular culture and bred the culture of death that we see today.
However, his book does not just make a negative case for secular philosophies. He also makes a positive case for the Judeo-Christian view of man, which Weikart says best aligns with what we know about the human condition (20).

In the first chapter, he discusses materialism and positivism. These views relegate man to a mere machine guided by chemical reactions or environmental cues. He is placed under the microscope. Everything about him is the subject of empirical study and explained using physical phenomena. Since knowledge can only come from the scientific method, then abstract concepts like morality are relegated to place of opinion or feelings.

The second chapter considers man as an animal, which includes Darwin’s influence. Weikart does not demonize Darwin, but instead introduces the reader to several characters who used Darwin’s theory to justify their own agendas, including those that wanted to call people of other races “less evolved” and people with certain neurological and mental disabilities “atavistic.”

This leads into the third chapter which addresses how biological determinism contributes to dehumanization and our culture of death. Importantly, the characters in this chapter assume that man lacks free will and is really a product of his genes. In making this assumption, they again reduce man to chemistry. Out of this determinism come eugenic principles and justifications for infanticide and euthanasia. Taken to its logical extreme, biological determinism led to the fascist government of Nazi Germany.

Chapter 4 is the other side of the coin of biological determinism. Weikart points out that the only options in a materialist worldview in which man lacks free will is that man is either a product of his genes or of his environment. In this chapter we see the logical consequences of environmental determinism that led to the communist governments of Stalin and Pol Pot.

Chapter 5 focuses on Epicureanism, or the pursuit of pleasure as the highest good. This view is distinct from Chapter 6, which focuses on existentialism and postmodernism, although both chapters discuss philosophies that center on the pursuit of pleasure and the avoidance of pain. However, where the utilitarians (chapter 5) took a rationalistic perspective on the pursuit of pleasure and focused on happiness and suffering at a societal level, the existentialists (chapter 6) sought the personal experience of pleasure even, in some cases, if one’s pleasure meant the pain of others. Both see suffering and pain as evil. Their denial of an objective reality invariably leads to the loss of ultimate meaning.

We see the consequences of these ideas played out today. Euthanasia has been legalized in several US states. Belgium and The Netherlands continue to widen the circle of people who qualify for physician-assisted suicide so that it now includes people with mental health problems and minors. We also see these consequences play out at the beginning of life with several academics providing a justification for infanticide, and broad acceptance that a disability justifies aborting a pregnancy.

While all of these philosophical threads seem quite different, key themes emerge: They assume there is no ultimate meaning and therefore no grounds for objective morality. They consider some people intrinsically better than others, whether it is because they have better genes or the right upbringing or can experience pleasure. Finally, a re-occurring theme among these worldviews is that many of its proponents will “import” morals from another worldview to avoid the logical consequences of their view. All these lead to minimizing the inherent dignity of the individual.

I appreciated that Weikart takes a historian’s approach to the topic. Rather than delving into philosophically heavy and abstract ideas, he demonstrates these philosophies by introducing the reader to a number of historical characters that typify the particular views. The reader sees how these characters were influenced by other philosophers, what cultural trends the characters are responding to, and how the characters’ experiences inform their perspective.

Death of Humanity is written with a tone that makes you feel as though you were sitting down with the author to converse on these ideas, which means this is not a survey of Western culture without comment. Weikart concedes when a particular character’s views are admirable, but also uses this to point out inconsistencies in the character’s worldview. Additionally, Weikart assesses the places where the logic of these philosophies undercut themselves

Death of Humanity is a very readable book that will appeal to a broad audience. I recommend it for those interested in the flow of Western culture.

*I am using “man” to refer to “mankind”

[غادة الحسيني · Rating 4 out of 5]

يبصّرك بسوء ما يحدث؛ لتذّكر نعمة الاصطفاء بأنك مسلم، وأنك نقي وإنسان.

[Brian Watson · Rating 4 out of 5]

[Finished reading on January 11, 2017, but didn't review it until now.]

Richard Weikart, a professor of history, has written an important book on something we should all care about: what it means to be human. In the introduction to the book, he says that he came to realize that many in our society are playing with "two dangerous presuppositions": "1. that some people's lives have greater value than other people's" and "2. that it is permissible to kill some people to benefit others" (2). As an example, he mentions a 2006 speech given by a professor at the University of Texas at Austin in which it was suggested that the world would be a better place if 90 percent of its population was wiped out by ebola. Instead of being greeted by shock and disgust, this suggestion was greeted by a standing ovation.

Weikart catalogs various ways that dangerous philosophies have led to dehumanization. These dangerous anthropologies include the ideas that we are machines (held by some Enlightenment philosophers and modern scientists), that we are animals (a belief that is the natural consequence of Darwinism), that we are merely the product of our genes (scientific determinism), that we are merely the product of our environments (environmental determinism and behavioralism), that we exist solely for pleasure, and that we have no ultimate meaning or purpose (existentialism, atheism, postmodernism). Many dangerous proposals been put forth, such as the idea that children should be removed from their parents or that those who are not fit should be sterilized or even killed. Genocide, abortion, and infanticide have occurred throughout history as the result of a low view of humanity. Euthenasia is on the rise; suicide, too.

Weikart sees these developments as the result of a rejection of the Christian view of humans, that we are made in the image of God, that we are loved by God, and that we should love one another. Current trends could lead to some nightmare-scenario dystopias. In fact, the desire to create a utopia often leads to horror. The way forward is to turn back to the Christian vision.

This book demonstrates how ideas have been passed down throughout generations. It shows that ideas have consequences.

A minor criticism is that Weikart doesn't provide proper secondary citations. If the original quote is found in another book, both the original citation and the second book should be cited. This allows the interested reader the ability to find the original. (The problem is mitigated by Google, but still, the primary source should be listed.)

[Robert Mckay · Rating 5 out of 5]

It is almost impossible to not recognize that the United States today has embraced a culture of death. We abort unborn human beings in numbers that make Hitler look like an amateur and rival the monstrous butcher's bills that Stalin and Mao racked up. We have, in some places anyway, legalized the practice of physicians murdering their patients. More and more people think it's perfectly all right to take firearms into a crowd and begin firing indiscriminately (a phenomenon that is not the result of guns - I grew up in the Mojave Desert surrounded by guns, but people weren't killing each other). Even among those who don't themselves kill or support killing images of death - e.g. skulls, skeletons, the name "Korpse" on a jersey - have become popular. Life seems to be a despised minority today, with death the triumphant majority.

But why? How did we come to the place where the great struggle isn't to preserve life against disease, but to persuade people that life is something worth preserving? This is the answer that Richard Weikart's book provides. I've known for a long time that the United States, and, I suppose, all the west, though I'm far from an expert on the culture of Europe and Australia, is in love with death, whether wholesale or retail, but I hadn't known why this had come to be. Weikart tells us.

As a Christian in the Biblical sense I reject the theory of evolution (not to mention the many vast holes in the theory), but I'd never really considered the results of accepting Darwin's notion's of "survival of the fittest" and of all life, including humanity, come about through the aimless operations of blind chance and natural law. But it is, in fact, Darwinism - or, at least, thinking along lines which we would call Darwinian - which has brought us to our current desperate state. Weikart goes into the primary sources, showing that beginning with the Enlightenment certain thinkers came to, and promulgated, the idea that there is no Creator, that therefore we just happened, that therefore we are no more important or valuable than an orangutan or a horse, and that therefore some individual human beings may actually be less valuable than such a valuable beast as a milk cow or a sheep. When one denies the imago dei, one denies that which gives us value and (I hate this word in this sense, but don't know of a better one) meaning.

Having thus denied that there is any inherent value in any human being - or at least that there is any inherent value greater than any animal - it becomes easy to say that Person A is more valuable than Person X, and that therefore Person A deserves to live more than Person X does. If our value isn't inherent, then it must derive from our usefulness. And so (as the reasoning runs) someone who designs an office building must be more valuable than the one who pushes a broom, and the one who discovers a cure for some disease must have more worth than the one who empties the trash at the end of the day. And from there it's just a step to eliminating those who lack value.

This is precisely the thinking of Adolf Hitler and the Nazis. It's not just that they were a pack of psychopaths who reveled in blood and destruction (although clearly that element was present), but that they believed they had scientific reasons for eliminating all those who were parasites, who didn't deserve to live, who merely cumbered the ground and who must make way for their superiors. It is this sort of thinking that led to the vast massacres with which Communism has burdened the world (Mao, Stalin, Pol Pot). It is this sort of thinking that backed the racism of Margaret Sanger (the founder of Planned Parenthood) and has led to abortion being the leading cause of death among blacks. It is this sort of thinking that has led to the involutnary killing of patients by so-called physicians becoming a significant cause of death in some European countries.

In short, as a direct result of thrusting God from the account of how man came to be, man has become worthless, of no value, and therefore as individuals something that one may exterminate as casually as one steps on an ant or sprays for roaches.

It isn't Weikart's purpose, here, to prescribe a cure. He is concerned to tell us what the situation is and why we're in it. But inevitably in the course of doing so, and explicitly in his conclusion, he does in fact speak of the cure for this abyss of darkness. He avows himself a Christian, and so defines Christianity that I believe he is very likely a genuine, Biblical Christian. He states plainly that it is the abandonment of God which has led us into our disastrous condition, and indicates that if we're ever to climb out of the pit, we must return to Him. I suspect he would agree that it would be best for society, not to mention themselves, if all human beings were to embrace Christ, but even if we simply returned to a Christianized society, where the morals and ethics of the Bible were the underpinning of law, of manners, of ethics, it would be a great benefit to all individuals, and to mankind corporately. Certainly that is the conclusion one can't help drawing, having absorbed the history and results in the case.

For everyone who finds our current situation dismaying, this book will provide the basis for understanding why where in that situation, and how we might perhaps get out of it. And all who, without knowing the foundations of their view, hold to relativism and the culture of death would do well to read this book, and see if they might not want something better than the bleak and violent world that such relativism will, sooner or later, bring into being.

[Axel · Rating 4 out of 5]

Dangerous suppositions - some humans are more valuable than others, it is permissible to kill a human for the benefit of others. There are murderers who "take the arguments of prominent individuals seriously, who assure us that we humans are not special, that human life has no intrinsic value, and that morality is illusory or even oppressive?" A medical professor in 1912 said "the care for individuals who from birth onwards are useless alike mentally and physically, persons of negative value, is a function altogether useless to humanity, and indeed positively injurious" and a law professor Karl Binding authored a book "that argued that some people, such as the mentally disabled, are lives not worthy of life, and it is permissible to kill such people to benefit the rest of society." Victor Frankl stated, "if we present a man with a concept of man which is not true, we may well corrupt him" as in Auschwitz, where he further stated, "I am absolutely convinced that the gas chammbers of Auschwitz were ultimately prepared NOT in some Ministry in Berlin, but rather at the desks and in the lecture halls of nihilistic scientists and philosophers." MLK wrote "a just law is a man-made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God... any law that uplifts human personality is just. Any law that degrades human personality is unjust."

[Superangela · Rating 1 out of 5]

I am more impressed with the good reviews of this book than by the book itself. The author tries (tries but does not achieve) to convince the reader that the death of humanity is being brought upon by atheists and agnostics. He goes into comparing different philosophers' and scientists' ideas and theories without looking into what the Judeo/Christian ideas have brought as well. For him, the crusades and the inquisition were acts carried out by bad Christians, but the bad deeds of atheists are representative of this demographic group. Laughable. There are bad people of all denominations.
Yes I think we are (I said we) are parasites in a tiny planet (thanks Russell), that does not mean that the impact we have in other people's life is unimportant. That love is unimportant. That respect is unimportant.
Waste of my time was this book....

[Anson Cassel Mills · Rating 4 out of 5]

The thesis of this book—written for the general reader—is that secularism in its various forms (including Darwinism, humanism, and postmodernism) must of necessity result in the devaluation of human life because secularism can provide life no meaning, purpose, or objective standard of morality.

Although comparatively few secularists actually behave in a manner ethically consistent with their beliefs and often “fall back on the moral resources they imbibed one way or another from a society and culture deeply influenced by Christian morality,” since the beginning of the Enlightenment, intellectual defense of secularism has betrayed a “cognitive dissonance.” (285) Of course, remnants of Christian morality will most likely continue to dissipate, and future secularists will probably feel fewer inhibitions about openly despising morality and degrading the sacredness of human life.

[Nelson · Rating 4 out of 5]

Humanity - as an ethical quality - has indeed died. This book catalogues the continued degradation of humanity resulting from the rejection of the Bible. From a philosophical perspective, the continuing secularisation of society intellectually stems from a rejection of teleology (design in nature), natural law, and, most importantly, the imago dei (the fact that we were made in the image of God) and the embracing of nominalism (simply, the view that things - such as humans - have no fundamental nature). This book well documents the immoral and wicked views which have grown like weeds from the soil of secular ideologies which reject the Creator.

Where has this led? The book lays out many of the logical intellectual consequences of the secular belief system: rejection of objective morality; belief in biological/social determinism and the claim that humans aren’t special as they are just another animal; acceptance of euthanasia, abortion, infanticide, eugenics, primacy of pleasure, suicide, etc.

The fact that so many of these things are widely accepted by such a significant proportion of people in the world is disturbing. Not only that, but many people celebrate and flaunt their acceptance of these things. The only solace I take in this sad situation is that it was foretold as a sign of the last days (2 Tim. 3:1-5).

The Death of Humanity was written by a historian, thus he draws many parallels between the prominent secular currents of thought and the views/practices of Nazi Germany & various communist regimes. He also provides a history of how these currents developed, biographies on some of their big proponents, including how their views influenced their behaviour & affected those around them. Lastly, he exposes the fundamental inconsistency and irrationality of secular systems of thought.

[Faisal S · Rating 4 out of 5]

عندما وضع الكاتب عنوان "موت الإنسانية " لم تكن مبالغه او محاولة جذب للقراء، بل ان العنوان اقل من واقع الكتاب الذي يعري النزعة الحيوانية للعلماء والمثقفين الذين صاغوا هذه الافكار التي قادت العالم إلى مانحن عليه الان.

عندما ننظر في وحشية العالم و موت الإنسانية نعتقد ان هذا نتاج حكم ديكتاتوري او أيدلوجية دينية متطرفة ، ولكن كل هذه الأفكار صيغت في قاعات الدراسة والجامعات من استاذة و مفكرين!! . و هولاء المفكرين أمثال تشارلز داروين ، نيتشة و غيرهم من المتاثرين في عصر التنوير الذين كانو سبب في الهام التطرف و الارهاب الذي شهده العالم الحديث.

يعوز المؤلف السبب الرئيسي هو نظرية التطور او "الدارونية" والمادية التي كانت المنحدر الزلق لكل الأفكار المقصوده في الكتاب مثل القتل الرحيم، الإجهاض، الاغتصاب و الإبادة الجماعية الخ…، من خلال ازالة قداسة حياة الإنسان و الصبغة الإلهية ( من منظور المسيحية) واعتبار ان الإنسان لا شي اكثر من ماده ، كتلة من اللحم او اداة يمكن الاستمتاع بها و التخلص منها .

يقوم الكتاب على ذكر الأفكار في كل الفصول من مختلف العلماء و المفكرين ، ثم ينتقدهم و يوضح مدى تناقض افكارهم و سذاجة طرحهم!! .

الكتاب من رأيي جميل ولكن يعيبه نقطتين :

١-الإكثار من أقوال العلماء في كل فصل وقلة نقد المؤلف نفسه.

٢- عدم ذكر موقف الدين الإسلامي من هذه الأفكار و لو بالشي البسيط الذي اعتقد من وجهة نظري انه سيسهل على الكاتب في إيضاح بعض الأفكار من منظور إنساني بسيط، مع ان الكاتب يستشهد في بعض الأحيان في الدين المسيحي- اليهودي بشكل لايذكر.

[Peter Kiss · Rating 5 out of 5]

An excellent, scholarly exploration of the self defeating fruits of secularism that feed the culture of death we live in. I don't know where Weikart falls theologically but this book is solidly presuppositional and he does a great job pointing out simple logical faults.

[Mai · Rating 5 out of 5]

وجدت الكتاب صوتيا مجانا على تطبيق منطوق للكتب

[Diana Ahmed · Rating 5 out of 5]

انصح به وبشدة، خصوصا لعبيد الغرب
وتحية للمؤلف المنصف، أسأل الله أن يهديه للحق