Survival of the fittest no longer exist? Watch

username251676
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#21
Report 9 years ago
#21
(Original post by Lukerchenko)
Take a look at society, we have healthcare, police etc, but isn't this stopping survival of the fittest? Evolution will not happen if everyone survives anyway. Because of this, there are a lot of fail genes in the gene pool, meaning that humanity is the worst species. If we let the worst genes survive, won't there be more rubbish genes for the next generation and so on? God help us.
I think humans stopped undergoing major evolution as individuals some time ago, when we pretty much wiped out the rest of the competition. Because we're creatures that exist in societies, evolution now takes place on a society wide basis, where different collections of people with different cultures, religions (Christian work ethic, be charitable, etc...), and so on attempt to survive best - perhaps this is where xenophobia comes from...
0
quote
reply
username251676
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#22
Report 9 years ago
#22
(Original post by Arteta)
But he's right, it doesn't mean you should go around killing people, but there will be to many. Too many people are surviving. Every other time in history has had setbacks in populations in large scales. WWII was obviously a big one, but since then what's there been? Who knows if there will ever be another...
As societies develop their birth rates sink dramatically, as our global economy develops it's likely that birth rates will eventually very slowly decrease
0
quote
reply
IWantSomeMushu
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#23
Report 9 years ago
#23
(Original post by Xerophelistica)
Survival of the fittest ultimately comes down to who manages to breed the most.

People with 15 kids are, from an evolutionary point of view, going to pass on their genes more than people who have 2 kids.

Make of that what you will.
But you could argue that it will be financially easier to feed two mouths rather than 15 mouths and so the two kids may grow up to be bigger and stronger than the 15.
0
quote
reply
OldSpeckledHen
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#24
Report 9 years ago
#24
(Original post by sandeep90)
But you could argue that it will be financially easier to feed two mouths rather than 15 mouths and so the two kids may grow up to be bigger and stronger than the 15.

Life History Theory. It's quality vs quantity, different species have faster or slower life histories, and it's been shown that it also applies to humans in different living conditions as well. It's an interesting area.
0
quote
reply
Fawn
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#25
Report 9 years ago
#25
(Original post by Lukerchenko)
But eventually it will get to the stage where there'll be too many people, ie resources will be diminished. Humanity can afford to get rid of a few people.
I'm Jenny and I just want to tell you that Madonna never adopted me.
0
quote
reply
Hugh-Jackman
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#26
Report 9 years ago
#26
(Original post by Lukerchenko)
Take a look at society, we have healthcare, police etc, but isn't this stopping survival of the fittest? Evolution will not happen if everyone survives anyway. Because of this, there are a lot of fail genes in the gene pool, meaning that humanity is the worst species. If we let the worst genes survive, won't there be more rubbish genes for the next generation and so on? God help us.
Agreed in this country, everyone staying alive due to healthcare, poor get given handouts who are lazy, stupid and usually physically weak and ugly. They breed like rats where the genetically superior have to work stupid hours to pay mortgage, bills, debts etc so have few kids.

Society is going to split into 2 eventually if they don't genetically modify people, a small ugly stupid class and a tall intellgent class.

All they got to do is stop with the handouts so much
0
quote
reply
joey11223
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#27
Report 9 years ago
#27
yes it is basically dead. My concern is that underlying genetic weaknesses might rear up later on. For example if one has a genetic problem which leads to a higher chance of heart disease the heart disease itself will likely be treated, rather then them dieing, so they will pass on this heart weakness to their children and it will get worse and worse as two people who both have a weakness of an organ due to genetics have children. If we had no medicine people would die but now we pass on genetic diseases making the situation worse, tendencies to get diabetes, cancer etc, all passed on because the conditions can be treated, however it's not an ideal situation.

Nothing we can really do though.
0
quote
reply
Pawsies
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#28
Report 9 years ago
#28
Survival of the Fittest definitely exists- look at places like Africa, deprived of resources because the richer countries have managed to make/steal/trade supplies for their countries whilst not giving that much thought to poorer countries- however times are changing.
0
quote
reply
DrDé
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#29
Report 9 years ago
#29
It's Called Survival of the Richest now.
0
quote
reply
emmie19
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#30
Report 9 years ago
#30
(Original post by Lukerchenko)
Take a look at society, we have healthcare, police etc, but isn't this stopping survival of the fittest? Evolution will not happen if everyone survives anyway. Because of this, there are a lot of fail genes in the gene pool, meaning that humanity is the worst species. If we let the worst genes survive, won't there be more rubbish genes for the next generation and so on? God help us.
Not to be harsh, but the severe learning disablities are lot less likely to reproduce. So it still does exists and it's no big deal.
0
quote
reply
emmie19
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#31
Report 9 years ago
#31
(Original post by joey11223)
yes it is basically dead. My concern is that underlying genetic weaknesses might rear up later on. For example if one has a genetic problem which leads to a higher chance of heart disease the heart disease itself will likely be treated, rather then them dieing, so they will pass on this heart weakness to their children and it will get worse and worse as two people who both have a weakness of an organ due to genetics have children. If we had no medicine people would die but now we pass on genetic diseases making the situation worse, tendencies to get diabetes, cancer etc, all passed on because the conditions can be treated, however it's not an ideal situation.

Nothing we can really do though.
1) fatty burgers
2) ****

It's all diet really now. The physically weakest die out first from their genes.
0
quote
reply
X

Reply to thread

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Do you like exams?

Yes (135)
18.6%
No (440)
60.61%
Not really bothered about them (151)
20.8%

Watched Threads

View All