Science and the Holocaust

[Kenisaw]

It was posted in another Science and Religion thread recently:

That you understand the import of your and every other individual human being on the face of the planet, that interpretation of science is not always in favor of that same importance, as - for example, the Holocaust, in which science was at the forefront making real, that imposed tragedy, and without the scientists the 'dumpsters' used to dispose of the so-called useless subjective human individual victims could never have been created for that use.

Question: Is science at all responsible for the Holocaust? Did science specifically target Jews?

[marco]

I have never assigned guilt re the Holocaust only to scientists.

Well obviously not. I believe Hitler played a part.

What I strongly implied was that without the abuse of science, the Holocaust could not have unfolded as it did.

Well that is cautious wording. It would have happened one way or another because the intention was there, the force to make it happen was there and all that was needed was an army of workers. Science of course made railways, trains and guns and supplied the efficiency for killing more people more quickly. Had Hitler lived a thousand years earlier, with the same intentions, he could have killed thousands of people with simple weapons just as the non-scientist Hannibal did at Cannae.

The cause of the Holocaust was the evil intent of Hitler with his Final Solution. The NT was an accessory in that it gives blanket condemnation of Jews as God killers.

[William]

[Replying to post 21 by marco]

Had Hitler lived a thousand years earlier, with the same intentions, he could have killed thousands of people with simple weapons just as the non-scientist Hannibal did at Cannae.

I assume that if we examined that historical event closely we would discover where scientific method played its part.

The cause of the Holocaust was the evil intent of Hitler with his Final Solution. The NT was an accessory in that it gives blanket condemnation of Jews as God killers.

Those are some of the ingredients, no argument from me regarding that.
At the time the founding of the State of Israel was already more than an idea as things were definitely heading that way.
Hitler and the Grand Mufti had interactions which one could suppose were a mix of the GM hating the idea of a State of Israel and Hitlers own concerns of Jewish practices in Germany which played a role in the eventual tragedy. Those are part of the recipe, we can agree.

But, as argument, they only serve as a distraction to the fact that scientific method was undeniably also part of that recipe.

[H.sapiens]

[Replying to post 19 by marco]

Well we can imagine anything. I can imagine scientists working hard to find a cure for dementia or cancer. Germany used scientists to help them bomb London from a distance. Germany used doctors to experiment on people. Germany invaded Czechoslovakia and Poland to start a dreadful war. People can use a mobile phone to do evil deeds. I can't see how the personification of science then assigning Holocaust guilt to it makes much sense. Perhaps we should blame Adam for eating a piece of fruit. That makes as much sense.

I have never assigned guilt re the Holocaust only to scientists. What I strongly implied was that without the abuse of science, the Holocaust could not have unfolded as it did.
Those who disagree are, of course, entitled to do so. The facts do not support them.


eta

Googled: "Are engineers scientists?"

Wow ... what about the German Army cooks without whom the death camp guards would have starved or deserted?

[marco]

But, as argument, they only serve as a distraction to the fact that scientific method was undeniably also part of that recipe.

They are hardly a secondary factor, a distraction from the real cause. We are in agreement about there being many factors in the horror of the Holocaust. All good history students are able to blame this or that and acquire marks for their perspicacity.

Science, per se, was not guilty; science was used in an evil way by wicked human beings. The music of Wagner may have contributed too or the abuse of oratory. We could lengthen the list of contributing factors: Germany's degradation after the squalid peace terms of WW1 brought Hitler to power. From there the Holocaust has a certain inevitability.

[William]

[Replying to post 24 by marco]

Science, per se, was not guilty;

How can a process be guilty?

How science was used to enable the guilty to have done what they did is the thrust of the argument.

That you understand the import of your and every other individual human being on the face of the planet, that interpretation of science is not always in favor of that same importance, as - for example, the Holocaust, in which science was at the forefront making real, that imposed tragedy, and without the scientists the 'dumpsters' used to dispose of the so-called useless subjective human individual victims could never have been created for that use.

Perhaps if you trace the quote back to the context in which it was being used, in the thread it was first mentioned, you and others might, by that, get the gist of what was being said in relation to scientists and the ways in which science as a process can be applied negatively.

To be honest, the arguments have become circular here and I always find ennui with the subject when this occurs. I have nothing else to add.

[marco]

[Replying to post 24 by marco]

Science, per se, was not guilty;

How can a process be guilty?

It can't, unless we are using personification, which we seem to be doing. The OP says: Question: Is science at all responsible for the Holocaust? Did science specifically target Jews? I am addressing the OP.

I have nothing else to add.

Very wise. You seemed at one point to be condemning Science (whoever she is) but if you accept we are moving round in circles, we have light.

[William]

[Replying to post 26 by marco]

It can't, unless we are using personification, which we seem to be doing.

The OP certainly does. The quote the OP used was taken out of context from that point.

The OP says: Question: Is science at all responsible for the Holocaust? Did science specifically target Jews? I am addressing the OP.

I have been addressing all the OP including the quote that was used.
As the quote the OP uses, say's

That you understand the import of your and every other individual human being on the face of the planet, that interpretation of science is not always in favor of that same importance,....

Hint: One would need to go back to where that quote was taken in order to understand the context it was used in.

...as - for example, the Holocaust, in which science was at the forefront making real, that imposed tragedy, and without the scientists the 'dumpsters' used to dispose of the so-called useless subjective human individual victims could never have been created for that use.

See how there in the quote it is specifically targeting humans who use science?

Very wise. You seemed at one point to be condemning Science (whoever she is) but if you accept we are moving round in circles, we have light.

At no point was i condemning science, as clearly you have not shown and you really should accompany such statements with examples in order to steer away from misrepresenting others.

As far as I am aware, at every point I was condemning the use of science by those treating subjective human experience as trash to be disposed of - and more generally, creating things which were/are detrimental to the health of the planet species.

[marco]

As far as I am aware, at every point I was condemning the use of science by those treating subjective human experience as trash to be disposed of - and more generally, creating things which were/are detrimental to the health of the planet species.

Then we are both condemning the abuse of science, such as using mobile phones to detonate bombs. Abuse of anything, of course, is to be condemned.

So we agree that Hitler and others caused the Holocaust. The fact they used trains to transport victims is only remotely connected to science.

[William]

[Replying to post 28 by marco]

So we agree that Hitler and others caused the Holocaust.

That was not even part of the OP argument. It is an irrelevant comment in regard to that.

The fact they used trains to transport victims is only remotely connected to science.

Where did trains come into the argument as the remote aspect of a use of science which can be connected to the Holocaust?

Did you skim over my last post? Because it appears you have ignored what I had to say and drifted off on some [strike]diversion[/strike] other track.

[marco]

[Replying to post 28 by marco]

So we agree that Hitler and others caused the Holocaust.

That was not even part of the OP argument. It is an irrelevant comment in regard to that.

You must be one of the few people on Earth who think Hitler's contribution to the Holocaust an irrelevance. When someone declares X did it, then it is highly relevant to show that Y did it. The point you're making is artificial.

Where did trains come into the argument as the remote aspect of a use of science which can be connected to the Holocaust?

You see, science invented trains. So if we are trying to blame science we might as well throw in train building as contributing to the guilt. Of course the scientific community wasn't responsible for the Holocaust; wicked people in Germany were, using whatever skills they had. Think Hitler - and we can't go wrong.