- #1
misgfool
I was just listening a catchy tune, which was longing for the golden past. What is the evolutionary function of nostalgia?
misgfool said:I was just listening a catchy tune, which was longing for the golden past. What is the evolutionary function of nostalgia?
S_Happens said:Why does it have to serve a function? Seems to me that it could easily be an unintentional product of other inherant (human) capabilities.
Nabeshin said:Agree.
It bugs me when people try to explain everything in terms of evolution and natural selection. It's powerful, but not omnipotent.
tony134340 said:Disagree.
For every cause, at least insofar as we can tell, there has to be an effect. We have these feelings for some reason. I guess we apparently have some evolutionary trash such as appendixes and such but something emotionally complex as nostalgic feelings, imho, seem to have a purposeful meaning.
Nabeshin said:I don't want to take time thinking up a specific example that I think irrefutably has no biological function, but I want to suggest the idea of emergence. It seems to me entirely possible, and probable, that brain functions which independently might serve some strictly biological function can combine to create a capacity of some sort which does not serve a biological function.
Nabeshin said:I don't want to take time thinking up a specific example that I think irrefutably has no biological function, but I want to suggest the idea of emergence. It seems to me entirely possible, and probable, that brain functions which independently might serve some strictly biological function can combine to create a capacity of some sort which does not serve a biological function.
tony134340 said:Disagree.
For every cause, at least insofar as we can tell, there has to be an effect. We have these feelings for some reason. I guess we apparently have some evolutionary trash such as appendixes and such but something emotionally complex as nostalgic feelings, imho, seem to have a purposeful meaning.
Are you sure that's nostalgia?physics girl phd said:I'm not sure... but I wish I could get rid of that warm fuzzy feeling that I get from the characteristic smell of the physics buildings I've worked inside.
S_Happens said:These are EXACTLY my thoughts as well. Very succinct.
The view of Nabeshin and I does not rule out causality, it simply allows for causes other than evolutional neccessity. I highlighted the last two words that show your own uncertainty. If you are only guessing, then you are unable to rule any other possibilities out. Don't get me wrong, I am not disallowing nostalgia to be an evolutionary neccessity, but I AM allowing other causes.
George Jones said:... sigh ... I remember a time when the value of nostalgia wasn't questioned ...
LowlyPion said:Of course it could be more basic in that we don't remember pain as well as happier things like say chocolate cake. If there was a vivid lifelong recollection of pain, would women ever have a second child?
Your phrase "evolutionary necessity" is unfortunate since it suggests that things can mutate in response to a need for certain traits, as if mutations could be caused by force of will. In fact, though, things mutate randomly and some mutations are advantageous, some are neutral, and some are disadvantages. It seems from the context of your post you understand and accept the latter, but that only makes your use of the phrase "evolutionary necessity" more confusing to me.S_Happens said:The view of Nabeshin and I does not rule out causality, it simply allows for causes other than evolutional neccessity. I highlighted the last two words that show your own uncertainty. If you are only guessing, then you are unable to rule any other possibilities out. Don't get me wrong, I am not disallowing nostalgia to be an evolutionary neccessity, but I AM allowing other causes.
I have to go with misgfool on this one George. And lighten up. Tell a joke now and then.misgfool said:Sorry about that chap, but questioning is a part of development.
jimmysnyder said:(This post is in payment of an old debt.)
zoobyshoe said:Your phrase "evolutionary necessity" is unfortunate since it suggests that things can mutate in response to a need for certain traits, as if mutations could be caused by force of will. In fact, though, things mutate randomly and some mutations are advantageous, some are neutral, and some are disadvantages. It seems from the context of your post you understand and accept the latter, but that only makes your use of the phrase "evolutionary necessity" more confusing to me.
"Necessity" is the problematic part of it, you see? Why not just say "evolutionary advantage"?S_Happens said:I am not using "evolutionary neccessity" to describe WHY mutation itself occurs, but to describe (in this case) an evolved trait that would be useful/advantageous/serve a specific function and therefore promote propagation of the species (ie a mutation that has ALREADY occurred and proves useful in a specific way).
This part of your post is clear.The OP, and others, are suggesting that nostalgia must be a function necessary to survival (at some point in human evolution), citing evolution as proof. The point I am trying to make is that it is very possible (and I believe more likely) that nostalgia is simply an emergent behavior, brought about by other inherant human traits.
I was inclined to agree with this until I noticed that the whole 'what is the purpose of' in this sentence is effectively retroactive guessing at whim without any real basis to do so. The majority of these 'scientific theories' of 'why people have nostalgia', 'why "men" look at "women's" breasts' et cetera are just largely guessing at whim, ask yourself, is there any way to truly verify your own hypothesis on such questions.S_Happens said:Why does it have to serve a function? Seems to me that it could easily be an unintentional product of other inherant (human) capabilities.
Then it's an evolutionary advantage not to believe it. There are more things which are 'true' which are an 'evolutionary advantage' to not believe. In fact, they are quite common, this is because ignorance is an evolutionary advantage 'ignorance is bliss', the mistake people often make with these things like 'the human genome is becoming weak' is that they fail to realize that their own opinion about 'good people' needn't concord with that of evolution. This is because evolution—of course—cares about one thing, ability to reproduce offspring that can again reproduce. I'm not sure about you but that's not really my own definite criterion on how much I value another man. The whole futuristic idea that man will evolve to startling intelligence is only fit for fiction, evolution does not lead to species who are 'advanced', it leads to species which are able to procreate in the environment they are put it. It's an evolutionary disadvantage to know a thing or two about physics it seems, physicists don't have that many children, I know few that even have a child wish.Redbelly98 said:Hey, I'm going to toss out this little paradox:
What if evolution is true, but it's an evolutionary advantage not to believe it?
Amen.svastikajla said:The whole futuristic idea that man will evolve to startling intelligence is only fit for fiction, evolution does not lead to species who are 'advanced', it leads to species which are able to procreate in the environment they are put it.
Then it's an evolutionary advantage not to believe it. There are more things which are 'true' which are an 'evolutionary advantage' to not believe. In fact, they are quite common, this is because ignorance is an evolutionary advantage 'ignorance is bliss', the mistake people often make with these things like 'the human genome is becoming weak' is that they fail to realize that their own opinion about 'good people' needn't concord with that of evolution. This is because evolution—of course—cares about one thing, ability to reproduce offspring that can again reproduce. I'm not sure about you but that's not really my own definite criterion on how much I value another man. The whole futuristic idea that man will evolve to startling intelligence is only fit for fiction, evolution does not lead to species who are 'advanced', it leads to species which are able to procreate in the environment they are put it. It's an evolutionary disadvantage to know a thing or two about physics it seems, physicists don't have that many children, I know few that even have a child wish.
Well, another common mistake about evolution is that people often fail to realize it has nihil præcognition whatsoever, it doesn't plan ahead. Hence the vast litter of rudimentary organs and in time life will become extinct solely because evolution cannot really cope any more with all the rudimentary organs it has acquired down its path.tony134340 said:Good points but what is evolving that is deemed important? These physicists do leave behind more advanced information which you can kind of see us as. We evolve to carry down our code. They, as we all do, transfer code and carry it to others. We learn, we find code which is advantageous for this code to survive. I kind of see it as code adding to code. Any way, in some altruistic sense, without children, they are still playing a part in human evolution.
zoobyshoe said:"Necessity" is the problematic part of it, you see? Why not just say "evolutionary advantage"?
Yes Garth, I do.Garth said:Do you remember the good ole' days before nostalgia?
Garth
I think it's a flawed approach to even speak of 'purpose' when debating evolutionary progression. The traits gained don't really have a 'purpose' to a specific goal. They simply get there by randomness and if the individual that has them gets more children than others, then they persist. They don't really have a 'purpose' to work for a certain goal. A lot of traits we have are also simply by-products of other traits that only in the modern society begin to surface. Like the fact that our teeth rot away without dental care before we turn ten, one can imagine that cavemen had no dental care, this is because this is due to our recent habit of sugar-overconsumption because we tend to like things sweet, even though it's advised against to eat it?S_Happens said:I see your point and agree with you, although we'd have to know the purpose of nostalgia to determine whether it was a neccessity or advantage, if it is resultant of evolution. I believe the strong, confident language used (must, have, etc) in the argument for it being a result of evolution prompted me to use neccessity over advantage.
S_Happens said:I see your point and agree with you, although we'd have to know the purpose of nostalgia to determine whether it was a neccessity or advantage, if it is resultant of evolution. I believe the strong, confident language used (must, have, etc) in the argument for it being a result of evolution prompted me to use neccessity over advantage.