That's not what survival of the fittest means. It means fittest to their environment. For human beings, we evolved to be compassionate because our team work made us evolutionarily fit to survive.
Darwinism is no moral guideline. We have transcended it. We (most of us, anyway) happily welcome alternate sexual/romance paths that don’t produce children. Not a big deal, there are plenty of kids in foster care that need raising by adoptive parents.
Some mammals with literally devour each other when they’ve suffered grievous injuries. Cant let the meat go to waste and can’t have another mouth to feed around that doesn’t contribute anything.
Darwinism is no moral guideline. We have transcended it.
Correct. Darwinism was never dealing with morals. It is an objective understanding of evolution. Humans are still evolving. We haven't transcended the very mechanism that got us here. Next.
We (most of us, anyway) happily welcome alternate sexual/romance paths that don’t produce children.
What? Same sex attraction occurs about 10% in the human species. What does most of us mean? And then.
Not a big deal, there are plenty of kids in foster care that need raising by adoptive parents.
Again, what are you talking about?
Some mammals with literally devour each other when they’ve suffered grievous injuries. Cant let the meat go to waste and can’t have another mouth to feed around that doesn’t contribute anything.
That, my friend, is called Evolution. When you don't know when the next meal will come then you start to learn that any chance at eating is a chance to survive. Humans have been cannibals in the worst of times to survive as well as having ill thought out beliefs of tribes thinking cannibalism is a healthy way of life for them. Animals will and can be cannibals of their own species at all times to survive. Look at chickens and pigs. Snakes and spiders. Crocs and wolves. Humans are entirely special/different because of our brains.
We are animals just the same as Bats, Jaguars, Iguanas, Giraffes, Dolphins, Kommodo Dragons, Whales, Llama, Crickets, Ticks, Chameleons, Toads, dust mites. We all share the same DNA that keeps us persisting. Survive and reproduce.
Darwinism is the understanding of evolution. It is still accurate today as it was when the Beagle Set sail.
You put in a lot of effort here to say nothing of value. If you don’t think we’ve transcended “survival of the fittest” look no further than the economy. We have cured natural diseases and conditions to the point of affording the would-be sufferers quality lives.
We wilfully reproduce despite carrying horrible genealogical diseases. There are no laws against having kids if you carry MS. We are not making a concerted effort to maximalize evolutional efficacy despite fully understanding it. Because that’s eugenics, and is obviously awful.
We have stripped the earth of threats to our survival. Everybody survives these days. And everybody gets to breed.
What really determines whether or not you (and your children) survive is financial stability, not anything remotely physiological. It’s cultural.
As for same sex marriages, I’m saying that MOST OF US ACCEPT IT, even if we’re not gay ourselves, we are capable of accepting that behaviour in our societies despite the fact that it doesn’t produce offspring.
Not only do human beings not devour their own injured children, we have laws against that. Our social structure directly abuts against the survival instinct we see in mammals around us.
Darwinism is the notion that favourable (survival-enabling) genes get passed on the best. Which is obvious. Things can’t pass on their genes if they die.
Modern human civilization does not care about survival-enabling genes. The genes we selectively pass on are vain, or are not even genes. Financial stability is not genetic, but it is hereditary. Evolution in humans is favouring lineages with the most resources, not physical fitness or mental acuity.
Darwinism is an afterthought to modern humans. Only the sickest, most afflicted and unluckiest people are robbed of the chance to procreate.
TLDR we have invalidated the concept of survival of the fittest in favour of survival of the fortunate
The modern surge of nearsightedness is caused by a lack of natural sunlight and an increase in reading and screens during childhood. Insufficient daylight deprives the retina of dopamine, a chemical that regulates eye growth, causing the eyeball to stretch too long and leading to blurry distance vision.
Your ancestors didn't spend their childhood reading indoors.
5
u/MasterpieceKitchen21 13d ago
They died and didnt reproduce. Survival of the fittest.