It reminds me of how Darwin was wrong about the strongest of the species fighting tooth and claw to be the survivor.
Sometimes they do, as you would know if you had ever bothered to take the slightest interest in natural history. However, this was not the essence of Darwin's point, as you would know if you had ever bothered to take the slightest interest in what he wrote instead of making stuff up.
Two canine animals in a time of dearth, may be truly said to struggle with each other which shall get food and live. But a plant on the edge of a desert is said to struggle for life against the drought, though more properly it should be said to be dependent on the moisture. A plant which annually produces a thousand seeds, of which on an average only one comes to maturity, may be more truly said to struggle with the plants of the same and other kinds which already clothe the ground. The missletoe is dependent on the apple and a few other trees, but can only in a far-fetched sense be said to struggle with these trees, for if too many of these parasites grow on the same tree, it will languish and die. But several seedling missletoes, growing close together on the same branch, may more truly be said to struggle with each other. As the missletoe is disseminated by birds, its existence depends on birds; and it may metaphorically be said to struggle with other fruit-bearing plants, in order to tempt birds to devour and thus disseminate its seeds rather than those of other plants. In these several senses, which pass into each other, I use for convenience sake the general term of struggle for existence. --- Charles Darwin, On The Orgin Of Species
{Someone should very much know better that posting such in the POTM forum - Adminnemooseus}
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Non-topic material hidden.
™ Version 4.2
