Is Human Evolution Over?

thorium1010

I think you kinda proved his point there. i.e. evolution is about an organism ability to reproduce (reffering to the last sentence).

Ryan_m_b

Yes but he was suggesting that survival of the fittest had nothing to do with reproduction

In actual fact reproductive success is an inherent facet of fitness

mishrashubham

Well not really. It is more of a semantic argument where both understand that evolution is heavily based upon ability to reproduce. However one also includes "reproductive success" when he says "fitness" while the other does not.

Ryan_m_b

Indeed but it's not just my definition. The various measures of fitness we use in evolutionary biology include reproductive success

thorium1010

Or that reproduction drives the ability to survive in an environment.ie the traits that makes organism fittest in a given environment is driven by the ability for reproduction.

Ryan_m_b

How? I'm not sure what you mean, the first point was fairly simple. Reproductive success is a necessary part of how we measure fitness.

mishrashubham

I understand. I prefer to include reproductive success in fitness as well. In fact that is what Spencer understood when he first coined the phrase "survival of the fittest".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surviva...a_tautology.3F
A lot of controversial matter in here.

Ryan_m_b

Definitely! I never see why people feel the need to apply principles from biology to how they should approach their morality. Especially when it's grossly misunderstood.

thorium1010

iam simply saying the traits that increase an organism's ability to reproduce, would also make that organism the fittest or increase its chances for living in the environment (survival of fitttest ).
also it could be argued that the individual with the abilty to survive would also give it the ability to reproduce. But thats the whole point the traits wont continue if reproduction is absent. So reproduction is a primary driver of evolution.

mishrashubham

Yeah, that would be a pretty interesting thing to study about.



*I got involved in a discussion so realised it late.

Ryan_m_b

I agree though I have a slight quibble, reproduction isn't a driver of evolution its a mechanism through which evolution works. Evolution, by definition, being over reproductive generations

thorium1010

Ok so a better thing would be to say is reproduction drives traits that increases the organisms ability to survive in a environment. ( imo thats one of the reasons religion exists )

DanP

No. The plain basic truth of life is the some humans are better than others. Smarter. Better looking. More attractive. Healthier. Stronger. Faster. With more endurance. With a better development of the PFC.

Yes, some humans are better than others. Besides, look at what enormity you wrote. You accept that humans are not equal, not born with same genes, nor having access to the same social nurture, but you don't accept that some are better. Embrace the truth my friend, some humans are orders of magnitude better than others :P And yeah, some men will get more women in a year than others in a lifetime.

If you read my post carefully, you will realize that I didnt said that genes are the only determinant of the behavior. This is something you imagined in your head. You have to start to differentiate between modulation and determination.


The contradictions are only in your head. I never suggest that is impossible to learn some things. I suggested that when you reach elite levels, genetics become important. You are naive if you beleive that a human can do anything he wants to do and raise to any level. Some simply don't have what it takes. Let's face it , we are not living in a world full of elite sprinters, elite scientists and extremely successful businessman which all have incomes of over 7 zeroes / year. The average humans are beings with no particular success in anything, but to bring some food at home. Blank averages. Nobody will remember them for anything but their immediate family.

Genetic propensities are important. Get a lower development of the PFC than your high school playmate, and chances are that you will end lower in the social hierarchy then him. As idiotic as it may seen, development of PFC in childhood are a very good predictor of where you will end on the social ladder.


No. Take any course in evolution at any university worth its salt and you will be told the same thing as I did told you. Survival of the fittest is a idiotic misnomer. Something for pop science on Discovery and the likes.


You would think that is wrong, but again, you fail to understand it. First , you can lave homosexuality apart. I was talking about heterosexual relationships. Second, all those things are pretty much statistical significant. This ofc does not exclude the existence of deviant behaviors, such as humans who dont want to be treated nice, or man who prefer to sleep with women overflowing masses of fat.

thorium1010

some men will get more women, but that does not automatically make him a reproductive success. what about polygamous cultures/societies where women are forced into marriage and they have high reproductive rate.

I am talking of reproductive success here, if you are talking about certain personalities or traits then thats fine.

mishrashubham

Yes some people are better than others, but only with respect to certain characteristics. You will very rarely find all those qualities in a single man.

Plus there is more to the brain than just the pre-frontal cortex.

DanP

True. Our social world is a complex one, with many different social hierarchies, and acquiring a high position in one specific hierarchy may require only some qualities. However, make no mistake humans are far from being equal. Some are necessarily better than others. Those climb to the top in their respective hierarchies. Some may go in teaching and end up as high school teachers, while others will end up teaching and doing research at top tier universities. Some will run little business while others will swim with the sharks on Wall Street. Some will raise in sports to state level , while others will excel in international level competition.

We, humans, are not born equal. Nor will those humans benefit from access to same resources during upbringing. Yeah, some are btter than others. Some are orders of magnitudes better of others. Some are shining like stars while others are pretty much natural born loosers.

DanP

What about that ? I miss your point.Polygyny is a very successful reproductive strategy for male who gets access to those females. Perhaps you want to insinuate that the key to reproductive success is access to no females ?

Second, the prerequisite to reproductive success from the pov of a male is access to as many females as possible, save for specific conditions when monogamy makes sense, for example in situations in which it takes two to raise the offspring.