Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9161 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,585 Year: 2,842/9,624 Month: 687/1,588 Week: 93/229 Day: 4/61 Hour: 0/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Personal Philosophy
Jumped Up Chimpanzee
Member (Idle past 4932 days)
Posts: 572
From: UK
Joined: 10-22-2009


(1)
Message 3 of 15 (550809)
03-18-2010 1:01 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by IAmMe77777
03-18-2010 5:39 AM


Hi IAmMe
Thanks for laying out your philosophy.
To say man is nothing more than an animal and biological organism is to deny empirical evidence to the contrary. For evidence, I offer the fact of Man ceasing to evolve. Yes, that’s right, humans are not evolving. While certain traits have become more prevalent species-wide (ie, height), we have effectively stopped evolving.
I don't think you can look at any contempory species and say whether or not it has stopped evolving. Calculations have been made that a species of mammal could increase at a steady rate from the size of a mouse to the size of an elephant in just a few thousand generations without it being possible to detect any such evolutionary changes within a human lifetime. It will only be possible to determine whether or not we are still evolving at this time in retrospect hundreds if not thousands of years in the future.
We have stopped evolution in two ways. First, we no longer practice random mating which is a prerequisite for natural selection.
When did we practise random mating? Exactly how and when did our mating habits change? Can you correlate that with evolutionary changes?
And second, we have stopped natural selection completely. The fittest are not the only individuals that survive and produce the most offspring. In our world of plenty, the least fit individuals piggy back on the world created by the strong and reproduce the most. Our lack of evolution is proof of our elevation above animal status.
You misunderstand the meaning of "fitness" in the context of evolution through natural selection. If the least physically or mentally able within our population are breeding the most (which I think is what you are implying - Richard Dawkins agrees that the least intelligent in modern society are breeding more) then that is because they are the "fittest" as far as natural selection is concerned within modern society. If we end up with a less intelligent population, we will have evolved to that state. Evolution doesn't have to move in one particular direction.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by IAmMe77777, posted 03-18-2010 5:39 AM IAmMe77777 has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024