Are human beings done evolving?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Kutt
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Human
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on whether human beings are still evolving or if Homo sapiens represent the final stage of evolution. Key points include the Hardy-Weinberg Equilibrium, which outlines conditions necessary for evolution to cease, such as a large population, absence of mutations, random mating, no migration, and no differential reproductive success. The distinction between evolution and adaptation is emphasized, noting that evolution refers to changes in species over time rather than individual changes. Selection pressures in the environment can influence reproductive success, but behaviors, such as reckless driving, may not necessarily have a genetic basis. The conversation also touches on whether behaviors need a genetic component to be subject to evolutionary selection, suggesting that strong selection pressures could favor different traits, regardless of their genetic origins.
Kutt
Messages
237
Reaction score
1
Are human beings still evolving or is homo sapien the final stage of evolution?

If we're not done evolving, have scientists hypothesized what the next stage of evolution might be like?
 
Biology news on Phys.org
Paraphrasing from another thread:
Morse said:
The Hardy-Weinberg Equilibrium describes the necessary events for evolution to stop.
1) A population must be large
2) No mutations may occur
3) Mating must be random
4) No migration
5) No differential reproductive success
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?p=3295080#post3295080
 
Is evolution the same as adaptation or is there a difference? I'm thinking if a person can adapt to something but its not passed on geneticly than its not evolution. Is that correct?
 
Elite Jacob said:
Is evolution the same as adaptation or is there a difference? I'm thinking if a person can adapt to something but its not passed on geneticly than its not evolution. Is that correct?

Evolution is the change in a species over time, not the change in an individual. A single organism does not evolve. Hit up the stickied post on evolution at the top of this forum.
 
There are mechanism within our environment which act to increase/reduce a groups reproductive capacity - often called selection pressures.

I would suggest that there is currently active selection against young men who like fast cars :-)
 
peter09 said:
I would suggest that there is currently active selection against young men who like fast cars :-)
I know this is in jest but this isn't correct because it implies that young men who don't drive recklessly do so because of a genetic component. Be careful when examining traits to think about all the possible causes, don't just chalk it up to genetics.
 
Ryan_m_b said:
I know this is in jest but this isn't correct because it implies that young men who don't drive recklessly do so because of a genetic component..

Well, you can't be sure there is NO genetic component to this type of behavior :wink:
 
Borek said:
Well, you can't be sure there is NO genetic component to this type of behavior :wink:
Of course, my point is that there is insufficient evidence to support any proposition that there is :smile:
 
  • #10
I know this is in jest but this isn't correct because it implies that young men who don't drive recklessly do so because of a genetic component. Be careful when examining traits to think about all the possible causes, don't just chalk it up to genetics.

In the spirit of interested discussion, and acknowledging that I am pretty ignorant about the details of evolution can I ask the following:

Does selection actually have to act on the genetic component of 'fast car driving' ... if the selection pressure is strong enough then selection FOR the 'playing computer games at home' genetic component could become dominant.

So - sort of - does a behavior have to have a genetic component to be selected against?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top