Natural Selection

[Kidthorazine]

well really in the end humanity will just nuke itself to death so natural selection in long run wont really matter to much...

[nyar]

It is up to the individual if he/she chooses to be a dumb primitive and not take (and pay for) modern medicine. If you don't want to live, then fucking die already and leave some oxygen for the rest of us who have shit to do. Don't worry - there are plenty of good diseases still around and new ones that will crop up for us to deal with.


And 23* - you made a great point... for all of the metaphysical relativism that gets thrown around, you would think that someone would stick up for the poor fucker who lost his hand in the lawnmower... "Well, maybe in HIS culture, the symbol of the RED WARNING TRIANGLE means 'do it like this!'"

First off- *23- the "warning lable" thing is not a question of aesthetics- its common sense!!!- I think most would agree with me that a certain amount of common sense is(or should be) requisite to exist.
now-
tinstar- I don't care what culture someone is from- when a huge metal blade is spinning at any kind of speed it should be (once again) common sense NOT TO TRY FUCKING WITH IT!!! Yes/No/maybe so- Physics, or just plain reality, is not culturally relative- whats dangerous or life threatening to us, is also dangerous and life-threatening to humans everywhere. Am I missing something?
2nd- Im not getting the medication thing- yes, I think if you're too stupid to take the necessary meds you deserve what you get.
I don't think that, or some of whats been said is misanthropic at all- if anything I think wanting the human race to prosper to its full potetial is philanthropic.

[TheDeathKnight]

Natural selection functions on a lot smaller scale, and also on a large scale.
In the large scale, if we destroy the ecosystem of the planet, or cause a huge
disease, or wipe out all the resources, some humans will survive it.
Who will survive? Maybe people with strong immune systems.
Maybe people who are tough and strong.
Maybe people who are really smart.
Maybe some of each. Or a combination...

Yes, natural selection happens on a small scale, every day.
Some idiot sticks his head in a lawnmower, and accidentally turns it on,
and that idiot just took himself out of the gene pool.
Some smart person realizes that they should not buy a certain type
of car, because it is not safe, and so they survive a car accident...
But these are all small scale things. The same smart person could
get hit by a truck, or get cancer, and the idiot could live a long life,
and have many offspring. So it does not really work in the small
scale. Natural selection works on a larger scale...
When some strange change happens in the world,
a few humans may survive, because of some ability they have.
Or because of where they chose to live...
If there is a disease outbreak, people who chose to live in
the cities will die, and those who chose to live in the boonies
will live. That's the kind of "intelligence" that makes someone
survive.

[23*]

I think most would agree with me that a certain amount of common sense is(or should be) requisite to exist.

see i don't; i think that being born is the requisite to exist.

Plenty of clever people end up in asylums or dead because they can't look after themselves; plenty of these people are famous authors (Slyvia Plath), economists (John Nash), philosophers, musicans (Syd Barrett: Pink Floyd,) and artists (Van Gogh).

I think we owe it to ourselves to take mental health seriously...if someone isn't able to look after themself i think they should be afforded help because it doesn't mean that they can't contribute something to society.

[killerkat]

When some strange change happens in the world,
a few humans may survive, because of some ability they have.
Or because of where they chose to live...
If there is a disease outbreak, people who chose to live in
the cities will die, and those who chose to live in the boonies
will live. That's the kind of "intelligence" that makes someone
survive.

i get your point ,but i see it as, the true "fittest" would be the ones that, athough they may live in the city with the plaque,they do whatever the hell they got ,be it smarts,athetisism or whatever, to survive,(in this case get the hell out of the city)........

more of the Reaction to the stimili not the precautious mind......



i think that applies to most of your post ,i just didn't wan to copy it all,and i don't disagree at all,just what i see from your idea.....

[TheDeathKnight]

True...

But at the same time, depending on the disaster, it can kill smart and dumb alike.
Fit and unfit, etc...

Sometimes it's just natural selection of randomly choosing to live someplace
that ends up to be safe. Let's say a bunch of total idiots live on some island
somewhere. If a big disease wipes out the entire modern human race, this
island of idiots will still survive, and so the human race will survive.

I guess all I am saying, is that the idea of natural selection does not
always mean that the strongest or smartest survives. I know we would
all like it if idiots and lazy people would just die. But it doesn't always
work that way. If there were natural predators, the only people that
would survive would be the strong and agile. Someone with genius
like Stephen Hawking would never survive. And if predatory beasts
were constantly stalking us, we would never have the time to sit
around and let scientists invent things.

And if you look at society, and science, and the growing ranks of the idiots,
then maybe that will be the new natural selection. When the shit hits the
fan, if we have smart people who can fix the problems, and survive,
then the race will survive. But if we have a society of idiots, they will
have no clue how to survive, and so they will all die... Imagine living
in a nuclear winter. Years with no sunlight, no crops, freezing weather, etc...
It might be so harsh, that even the strongest would not survive.
Maybe only people smart enough use science to create a biodome,
or some such self-contained enclosure, could survive...

So natural selection still works.
It just does not work the same way for humans.
It hasn't worked the same since we started using our brains more than we
use our bodies to survive... Now it's more about who is more clever, not who
is strong, etc... If I am clever enough to get a good job, then I get food, get to
breed, and get ahead. If I am not clever enough, I don't do anything with my life...
If you are not clever, you end up in the rat race soul-sucking meat-grinder.
That's the new version of natural selection.
It's pretty lame.

[tinstar]

I think it's less likely that we'll party ourselves out of existence. I think it's far more likely that we'll place a greater and greater focus on work, while simultaneously failing to actually achieve more in the process. We sure will leverage more synergies, though, as we establish best practices for customer-facing enterprise initiatives.

We're building a culture of pointless effort, duckspeak, and constant commisseration.

That is a beautiful paragraph. And a good point. Much of the "work" that goes on these days is a revolving door of business school nothingness with snotty MBAs abusing and burning out the talents of engineers, programmers, architects, etc....

[tinstar]

tinstar- I don't care what culture someone is from- when a huge metal blade is spinning at any kind of speed it should be (once again) common sense NOT TO TRY FUCKING WITH IT!!! Yes/No/maybe so- Physics, or just plain reality, is not culturally relative- whats dangerous or life threatening to us, is also dangerous and life-threatening to humans everywhere.

You nailed it, man... Thanks for catching the absurdity in my comment... Now extend that thought to everything else that is dangerous to human life and you are getting somewhere. Common sense becomes less common when stretched past a certain point, but the end result is the same - objective, and culturally IRRELEVANT. Dead is dead.

[Cafe_Post_Mortem]

See I hear a lot of people talking about natural selection failing man kind, personally I see it as alive and well. See the problem is, you are on the loosing end of natural selection. The stupid you keep talking about obviously aren't that stupid. The live, breed and thier line continues wether or not they stick their hands in the lawn mower. They gather together in large groups and bend society to support them. Meanwhile us so called smart people sit around hoping they will drink draino before they have kids. The 'stupid' are better adapted to thier environment than us, and they prove it every day.

Every time you see a warning lable telling you not to put you penis in the blender, know that this is the result of superior evolution protecting his genetic legacy while yours withers and dies. The world won't always need a genius, but it will always need ditch diggers.

Natural selection in action.

[Titus]

1. The idea of 'natural selection' is a theory and not a discovery, same as the idea of devolution (I think Spencer or TH Huxley came up with). It's models and maps of reality, but not reality itself.
2. The Nietzschean idea of the Uebermensch is poetry - and as everybody knows much abused poetry - not science and not philosophy. (A certain L. Ron Hubbards ideas about aberrations and 'clears' are not rated here...)
3. The claim for natural selection within our super-artificial circumstances is in fact very decadent - and: artificial; and I think it is fear from heterogenity & wish for more homogenity; it more or less boils down to minorities surpressing or wiping out other minorities, and labelling it later on as 'natural selection'.

ps: sorry if I sound like the typical moralizing orthodox satanist, but
I think some amazing artists might change their POV, given another geo-historical background......

[inox]

Thing is, we can't really be outside of nature, so none of this happens in a vacuum. Regardless of what we decide to permit as a society, the world seems to have a way of challenging the species that dwell on it. We're too otherwise harmless and frail for low intelligence to be a beneficial trait. So, we'll either end up dying out or the pendulum will swing back the other way.

[tinstar]

See I hear a lot of people talking about natural selection failing man kind, personally I see it as alive and well. See the problem is, you are on the loosing end of natural selection. The stupid you keep talking about obviously aren't that stupid. The live, breed and thier line continues wether or not they stick their hands in the lawn mower. They gather together in large groups and bend society to support them. Meanwhile us so called smart people sit around hoping they will drink draino before they have kids. The 'stupid' are better adapted to thier environment than us, and they prove it every day.

Every time you see a warning lable telling you not to put you penis in the blender, know that this is the result of superior evolution protecting his genetic legacy while yours withers and dies. The world won't always need a genius, but it will always need ditch diggers.

Natural selection in action.

As the dark ages proved, nothing much happens without geniuses. Who is going to tell the ditch diggers how/what/why to dig? "Society" can try to bend the geniuses all they want, but smart people generally reject slavery and either become broken down and worthless or simply stand strong and refuse to produce.

inox - You said we don't live outside of nature... So are our wars (which may wipe out entire cultures) a part of natural selection? Just a question to get your opinion...

[TheDeathKnight]

There are wars in the animal kingdoms all the time.

Army ants will wipe out entire ecosystems when they go on the warpath.

Viruses and bacteria can wipe out entire species of creatures,
in their effort to survive and reproduce...

There are many, many failed species, that became extinct.
Many times, after being wiped out by an invading species.
It happens all the time in isolated places, like islands...

[One Eyed Cat]

Thing is, we can't really be outside of nature, so none of this happens in a vacuum. Regardless of what we decide to permit as a society, the world seems to have a way of challenging the species that dwell on it. We're too otherwise harmless and frail for low intelligence to be a beneficial trait. So, we'll either end up dying out or the pendulum will swing back the other way.

Precisely. It is amusing the extent to which we attempt to override mother nature. She will have the last laugh.

OEC

[Cafe_Post_Mortem]

As the dark ages proved, nothing much happens without geniuses. Who is going to tell the ditch diggers how/what/why to dig? "Society" can try to bend the geniuses all they want, but smart people generally reject slavery and either become broken down and worthless or simply stand strong and refuse to produce.

The genius may make life easier, but we don't need them. Sad, simple fact is they exist at the whim of the common man. Trail and error works very well, if not as quickly. All genius does is speed up the process, or just distract us from it.

Adapt or die. It is as true for the genius as it is for anyone else.

[inox]

tinstar wrote:

inox - You said we don't live outside of nature... So are our wars (which may wipe out entire cultures) a part of natural selection? Just a question to get your opinion...

I don't see anything as being outside of natural selection. I believe that the universe tends toward complexity, bound only by what's already come to pass (see Stephen Wolfram's cellular automata theories).

The problem I see is when people start to look at the process of natural selection as having a specific purpose or a beneficial goal. It just is.

[tinstar]

tinstar wrote:


I don't see anything as being outside of natural selection. I believe that the universe tends toward complexity, bound only by what's already come to pass (see Stephen Wolfram's cellular automata theories).

The problem I see is when people start to look at the process of natural selection as having a specific purpose or a beneficial goal. It just is.

Cool... I am down with that... I will check out the Wolfram recommendation too...

[tinstar]

The genius may make life easier, but we don't need them. Sad, simple fact is they exist at the whim of the common man. Trail and error works very well, if not as quickly. All genius does is speed up the process, or just distract us from it.

Adapt or die. It is as true for the genius as it is for anyone else.

Adapt or die... This is true... But who will adapt more quickly and survive (genetically and physically) as a result? People with logical and analytical skills who can see the way out of the problem? Or people who use "trial and error" to solve problems? Ask anyone who plays chess if trial and error produces very many wins... Ask a doctor if trial and error saves very many patients. This is a question of epistemology, but it relates.

As far as genius goes, it doesn't grow on trees and people are not born with it, as far as science can prove. Thought is a choice; energy expended on research and exploration is a choice. Not everyone makes this choice - common men are common because they haven't made the right choices to become geniuses. True, WE don't NEED geniuses. But they sure do make life better. It is a false premise to believe that if George Washington had been a bad leader, some "common man" could have led the US to defeat Britain. Common men take common action. Common action does not advance civilization, nor does it advance the individual. Common action does not save humanity from going the way of the dinosaurs someday.

[tinstar]

The genius may make life easier, but we don't need them. Sad, simple fact is they exist at the whim of the common man. Trail and error works very well, if not as quickly. All genius does is speed up the process, or just distract us from it.

Adapt or die. It is as true for the genius as it is for anyone else.

Just as an example that we can all relate to, saying that genius exists at the whim of the common man is like saying that Amelia and Forrest owe their little internet empire to the whim of all the shitty photographers out there who don't know pixels from pointillism.

[Cafe_Post_Mortem]

That isn't really a good example. Let's try a better one.

I don't think anyone will agrue the talent behind BlueBlood. However they are not as successful as say the Girld Gone Wild guy. I am pretty sure no one will argue that Girls Gone Wild is better shot than Amelia and Forest's work. In fact I will go so far as to say the Girls Gone Wild camera work is pretty sloppy. So why is GGW more financially successful than Blue Blood? Because he was willing to make whatever people wanted without burdening himself with quality. Does this always work? No, but neither does being talented and smart. George Washington didn't win the war, it was all those other guys throwin and catchin bullets that did (not to mention what was goin on back in Europe). George just made it easier. But thanks for phrasing your example so it looks like I am attacking the website if I stick to my point.

And my point is, as much as we don't want to here it, if it seems like everyone else in the world is stupid it might be time to review how you are doing things. It may seem stupid to you and me that someone put the following directions on a can of cheezewiz, "For best results, remove cap." but while we sit here and debate the idea that removing this warning will somehow fix the world, the so called idiot is enjoying his cheezewiz and moving on.

[tatdownthere]

Yosuga is a very interesting and relavant type of Philosophy to that subject. **

wahts Yosuga?

[tinstar]

That isn't really a good example. Let's try a better one....

....while we sit here and debate the idea that removing this warning will somehow fix the world, the so called idiot is enjoying his cheezewiz and moving on.

Yeah, I wasn't really hung up on the whole "warning label" thing anyway. I picked on that because I thought it was funny and reminded me of something else (the part about cultural relativism being an excuse for literally ANY kind of retarded behavior).

I definitely didn't intend to make it look like you were attacking this website. I only meant to say that their work and success doesn't depend on other people who are not as good. GGW's "art" (yikes!) has been more financially successful that BB in part because GGW's sense of life is more appealing than BB's to more people. There is still an interplay of submission and domination, but GGW would probably never feature a girl with a gun pointed straight at the camera.

And absolutely, there are many people who contribute to the winning of a war, but there must be a strategic, logically thinking mind to direct things. Take Gladiator, for example. Yes, each individual gladiator was strong and smart, but it took Russell Crowe's character to get them to band together and move strategically, even if temporarily, to save their own lives. And if anyone was out there taking a hit, it was easily him.

(I meant to PM this one to ya, cause I feel like I wrecked the whole topic... but I got a msg about Administrator has shut off PM or something...)