Superman can run around the world as many times as he wants, jump over buildings, and have sex with a hundred women, but if he's impotent, he is a failure of natural selection. (I have no idea if Superman can really have kids or not.)
Speaking about racism. In a situation where one group is oppressing another group, assuming the oppressors are only breeding with each other, and the people being oppressed are breeding with at least each other, and at best people from other groups (ie. other oppresed groups) then they are becoming more advanced genetically, then the other group.
Interesting to think about, and that doesn't promote racism, but that the race, as a whole, will be evolving faster, than an inbred group of oppresors.
[ 02-07-2004: Message edited by: Pvednes ]
So the weak/stupid (mostly the latter) do indeed sometimes get removed from the gene pool.
[ 02-07-2004: Message edited by: diadem ]
quote:
Naimah impressed everyone with:
When you line up in the starting blocks one man is not declared the greatest before the starting gun.
Though I understand your analogy, it is flawed. Life is not a race. There is no goal other than to reproduce and survive, and for some, that is not even their end goal.
As for races, when most of our competition went up against my team in highschool, it was over before it began. We simply don't lose. Most of our competition was simply out of their league. They didn't have the training, physical strength or endurance, mental willpower, or sense of whits (which is important - it's part of why we always won) to beat us. Even before the gun is shot, there is no question who will win or lose. The reason for this is that this is a physical challenge with set factors and limited variables.
The thing is; that was a physical race for a specific aspect of being. During a race, there are a set number of factors and a pre-determined goal. Life is not like this. People are not even competing against each other. Because of this, comparing a race to succeeding in life is not fully accurate.
Survival of the fittest would at least imply a sort of goal to reach and some sort of competition. The playing field is not set, and there is no universal goal. The factors that enter the race are almost infinite, an unlike a physical challenge the ideology of those around you are extremely important for "success." "Success" in itself is even a vairable, and diffrent for every player.
[ 02-07-2004: Message edited by: diadem ]
What corollary I can give parce is simply this "People's environment effects one's behavior and ability to reach certain goals in life, if such goals exist. People need to change the environment around them, adapt to it, move to a more suitable environment, or find a new set of goals if they wish to overcome obsticles."
quote:
Somthor enlisted the help of an infinite number of monkeys to write:
I think the better statement of what you are trying to say would be this.survival of the fittest describes the fittest as those who will leave the most offspring, (are successful ) Fitness is not a physical feature that can created, but a description of how successful a particular organism is in passing along its genes (winning) under a certain set of circumstances and in relation to others.
sorry parce this is the best I can come up with, I guess I'm missing the point.
I killed far too many brain cells last night and argument tends to make me sick.
