0
Darius11

Natural selection in the human race.

Recommended Posts

If you believe in something like the punctuated equilibrium theory of evolution then the differences in societies, weak members, etc. are mostly irrelevant.

Even if you don't, we also would be far from the only animals to act communally--ants, bees, pack mammals, etc.
"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

not eliminate people, eliminate lazy nature of the people by making them care for themselves. take away their free ride.



Right, remove most/all svs so then nature can take its course and select the ones who do not make it. I got ya.

Quote

why don't we ask the dead people in China how well a dictatorship is? china is not natural selection it is selection of a dictator, there is a difference.



You mean selection by a dictator. Here's how the line of question went:

MARKS: the same goes for what is happening to us in the US today, when the entitlement programs become more than the country can handle the country will collapse and the result of that will be something none of us can really envision.

LUCKY: Oh, so Socialist Europe is doing poorly? How about Communist China; how's their NS working out? They have 4 times the people and are the most economically successful currently. Oops, what's that noise? Is it the air being let out of your brilliant theories?

MARKS: why don't we ask the dead people in China how well a dictatorship is? china is not natural selection it is selection of a dictator, there is a difference.


So with that, countries with greater Socialist programs are doing better, have a better standard of living, have better economies and aren't 12T in debt. This is not a conversation about dictatorships, it's about natural selection and you posed that too many entitlements lead to the destruction of a nation and I have illustrated that that clearly isn;t the case. The country with of the fewest entitlements is doing very poorly.

Quote

As far as europe goes, they are being over run by radical Muslims and are slowly loosing their countries to Muslim control. we will see how that turns out all the females are wearing bukas and the men are all nealing and praying to alla.or how many will die in the next war.



Again, you're shifting the conversation from your assertion that entitlements lead to a countries destruction to how horrible Musslims are; get back on track. And say hi to your mom: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YIq5Q15L1o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Natural selection is a bit hung up now - the traits we believe are important are not matches with the traits that lead to reproduction. So our evolution depends in part on which traits are truly genetically driven.

In short, wealth and intelligence is associated with lower birth rates. With a small number of exceptions, the successful have smaller families. Birth rates in Europe and Japan are flat or negative, and would be close in the US for non immigrants.

What this means is less clear. One's likelihood of success comes from some mix of genetics, drive, and opportunities provided (namely, how successful were your parents).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

But since most people don't need glasses to correct vision until later years when they aren't reproducing, that is statistically irrelevant.



Use of corrective lenses certainly correlates positively with age but if 30-40% of people in their prime* have corrective lenses it's hardly irrelevant.

Using technology to nullify the selective effects of a negative trait isn't that interesting though. What's more interesting, imho, would be a situation where it became "cool" to have glasses, or perhaps one in which having glasses became associated (rightly or wrongly) with a positive trait such as intelligence, and became preferred in the selection process. That would be a true "bastardization" of natural selection.

* sorry for the old data but I'm lazy.


That ref is from 1971; is it possible you could find an older study perhaps? B| I'll look something up. I checked, didn't find anything relevant. But how about this, needing glasses isn't binary, it's progressive. I bet the number of people with incredibly poor vision at a young age is limited.

And at the same time, not wearing glasses and having poor vision could actually promote reproduction...if ya get what I mean :D. Of course beer goggles definately promotes reproduction where otherwise there would be none.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

(namely, how successful were your parents)



Agrred, 100%, born classism. Class mobility used to be an option, not much anymore. That was the American dream, a lot of immigrants have been dissolusioned.



sorry, can't agree with you. I was born to a single teenage mom, thrown out of the house for the sin of having me. So she had to go the GED route before JC, college, and grad school. She was able to provide about half my costs to go to a public school; I worked to cover the rest. And then worked to get to where am I. Environment was a small contributor, but for us it was our innate intelligence + effort that allowed us to succeed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I respect that a lot, and kind of grew up the same way. First job was at 12.

But for me i think Environment was a huge contributor. I don;t think i could do what i did if i was born in Somalia, or if i did not come to the US as a child. I worked after school and the money i made was more then enough for what a 12 yearold wants. I even helped out the fam.


Edit: Left what i said up there just so peopel know what the heck i am talking about.

You know I take what I said up their back. I think your right. Because even in Iran I was the only kid I knew who worked. Many others didn’t therefore they did not enjoy the things I could do for my self and afford the freedom your own money brings. I did not need to work in Iran like i did in the US.

So I think your right. Even if I was in Somalia I might not have the life I do here, but I would still be trying for a better life.
I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

(namely, how successful were your parents)



Agrred, 100%, born classism. Class mobility used to be an option, not much anymore. That was the American dream, a lot of immigrants have been dissolusioned.



sorry, can't agree with you. I was born to a single teenage mom, thrown out of the house for the sin of having me. So she had to go the GED route before JC, college, and grad school. She was able to provide about half my costs to go to a public school; I worked to cover the rest. And then worked to get to where am I. Environment was a small contributor, but for us it was our innate intelligence + effort that allowed us to succeed.



Well, and your humility.

Statistically irrelevant. A sample size of 1 or 2 that isn't random is meaningless to the point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


Statistically irrelevant. A sample size of 1 or 2 that isn't random is meaningless to the point.



Your diatribes are driven by your own experience, which has the same sample size.

Effort matters, more than just about anything else these days. This is especially true for those who are brave enough and dedicated enough to succeed in their own business.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Your diatribes are driven by your own experience, which has the same sample size.



My assertions are generally backed with evidence that is external, independant and objective. You've been unable to even try to refute any of them. Furthermore, trying to defeat me to make your sample size of 2 non-random a statistically, relevant piece of data is ridiculous. With me, absent me, puny sample sized non-random examples are not statistical.

Effort matters, more than just about anything else these days. This is especially true for those who are brave enough and dedicated enough to succeed in their own business. ***

Congratulation then, my hat is off and covering my heart, I am simultaneously waving a flag with my other hand. Now, back to the regularly scheduled argument.

***

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>The cold reality of nature is that the weak would die.

Well, everyone dies. The issue is - do you die before you reproduce?

>Which traits get passed on more?

The two primary ones are the ability to live to age 18 and the ability to have children. A lot plays into that. For example, a lack of intelligence severe enough to prevent someone from understanding birth control encourages the second trait.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've used the opening scene from "Idiocracy" in several posts before. This seems to be the perfect thread for it though. This is really where I see the future if things keep going the way they are.

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/2682654/idiocracy_opening_sequence/

Either natural selection or start modifying the gene pool. Stupid should still hurt.:D:D:D

"There is an art, it says, or, rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss."
Life, the Universe, and Everything

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

We have made ourselves physically weaker and less disease resistant than our ancestors, but intellectually we are further ahead.



And it turns out, that's all that matters. As long as smart people live long enough to breed, the human race will continue to be the dominant life form on this planet (excluding exo-planetary intelligence ;) ). All the pondering about sabre-tooth tigers, who's strongest, fastest, et al, are irrelevant as long as we have nuclear weapons.
Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

So with that, countries with greater Socialist programs are doing better, have a better standard of living, have better economies and aren't 12T in debt. This is not a conversation about dictatorships, it's about natural selection and you posed that too many entitlements lead to the destruction of a nation and I have illustrated that that clearly isn;t the case. The country with of the fewest entitlements is doing very poorly.



Which, of course, explains the massive exodus of people fleeing to Cuba on homemade rafts.
Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

So with that, countries with greater Socialist programs are doing better, have a better standard of living, have better economies and aren't 12T in debt. This is not a conversation about dictatorships, it's about natural selection and you posed that too many entitlements lead to the destruction of a nation and I have illustrated that that clearly isn;t the case. The country with of the fewest entitlements is doing very poorly.



Which, of course, explains the massive exodus of people fleeing to Cuba on homemade rafts.



There ya go, did you forget Africa? Instead of the rhetoric, explain how Communist China is doing FAAAAAAAAAAAR better than Capitalist US. How are most W European nations doing better than the US? Or just keep choosing the worst places on earth to make you feel better about the US.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Instead of the rhetoric, explain how Communist China is doing FAAAAAAAAAAAR better than Capitalist US. .



Explain to us how over 1B Chinese are doing better first.
(no, not the wealthiest 10% there - I know they're doing fine)



Oh, so Communist China and fascist US have a lot in common, huh?

I will give you that, most Chinese people live in poverty, but at least their country is strong and they have HC. Many in the US live with a low standard and our country is a wreck on the global market, that is the diff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

Instead of the rhetoric, explain how Communist China is doing FAAAAAAAAAAAR better than Capitalist US. .



Explain to us how over 1B Chinese are doing better first.
(no, not the wealthiest 10% there - I know they're doing fine)



Oh, so Communist China and fascist US have a lot in common, huh?

I will give you that, most Chinese people live in poverty, but at least their country is strong and they have HC. Many in the US live with a low standard and our country is a wreck on the global market, that is the diff.



Quite the fantasy you have there. Perhaps you should move to inland China.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Holy cow -- that's some serious cherry-picking. Sorry, but while there are many, many Chinese who are happy to live where they are, we have more freedoms, a higher standard of living as a whole, and most of us have better health care than the Chinese.

Because while it's provided, the number of people is such that what we consider to be a good standard of health care isn't available there. They do focus more on preventive than curative care. And if they go to a specialist, coverage only provides about 30% (according to wikipedia).

The US is not perfect. I don't think that saying that makes me less American or anything. But overall what Americans have available to them is superior to what the Chinese have available to them. Our protections and services are generally superior. As is our government's respect for our individual rights.

Wendy P.
There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Instead of the rhetoric, explain how Communist China is doing FAAAAAAAAAAAR better than Capitalist US. .



Explain to us how over 1B Chinese are doing better first.
(no, not the wealthiest 10% there - I know they're doing fine)



Oh, so Communist China and fascist US have a lot in common, huh?

I will give you that, most Chinese people live in poverty, but at least their country is strong and they have HC. Many in the US live with a low standard and our country is a wreck on the global market, that is the diff.



Quite the fantasy you have there. Perhaps you should move to inland China.



I made several points, which point are you running from this time?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Holy cow -- that's some serious cherry-picking. Sorry, but while there are many, many Chinese who are happy to live where they are, we have more freedoms, a higher standard of living as a whole, and most of us have better health care than the Chinese.



It wasn't cherry-picking, it was a generalization. Follow the thread and you will see the point of comparing economies.

As for, "...most of us have better health care than the Chinese. " Perhaps thru your rose-colored glasses. Most Chinese have the same HC, Most Americans have such a diversity of HC from none at all to exquisite. To find an average, who knows. Don't think, for a second that I like Communist China's governemnt, it is oppressive, but the distribution of wealth is probably similar to that of ours. That was the original point.

Quote

They do focus more on preventive than curative care. And if they go to a specialist, coverage only provides about 30% (according to wikipedia).



One more thing the US and China have in common.

Quote

The US is not perfect. I don't think that saying that makes me less American or anything.



Of course not, only Nationalist Neo-cons would say that dissent is bad.

Quote

But overall what Americans have available to them is superior to what the Chinese have available to them.



Probably, altho minute in some areas. The context of my assertion was that the US distribution of waelth is probably like the Chinese DOW in many respects with virtually all the money and asset up toip, special privilege,etc.

Quote

Our protections and services are generally superior. As is our government's respect for our individual rights.



W/o a doubt, I was never talking that piont.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote



For the people who do believe in evolution and science. I hope that’s most of us. What is our effect on natural selection for our own species?

It is obvious that when it comes to our species we interfere with evolution.

What effects will this have?
Are we seeing these effects already?

Which traits get passed on more?

The cold reality of nature is that the weak would die. What is weak in the terms of our life today?

What will become of us?



Evolution favors those that most effectively pass on their genes to subsequent generations. Evolution doesn't care how or why or what OUR values are.

If, on account of our species traits of altruism and greed, that those you consider "weak" reproduce more effectively, then that's the way evolution will go. We haven't interfered with it, we just changed the parameters describing success.
...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0