Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Evolutionary Equilibrium

  1. Population control

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  2. Asexuality

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  3. Automation

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  4. Mass destruction

    1 vote(s)
    25.0%
  5. Artificial intelligence

    2 vote(s)
    50.0%
  6. Genetic engineering

    3 vote(s)
    75.0%
  7. Enhanced longevity

    1 vote(s)
    25.0%
  8. Eugenics law

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  9. Pharmacopoeia

    1 vote(s)
    25.0%
  10. Virtual reality

    1 vote(s)
    25.0%
Multiple votes are allowed.
  1. Apr 14, 2003 #1
    Which artifice will fastest outpace inborn adaptations?
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 14, 2003
  2. jcsd
  3. Apr 14, 2003 #2

    FZ+

    User Avatar

    None of them. You can't reverse natural adaptation. You can have continued adaptation in the opposite direction (like if it suddenly became desirable to be a lump of primordial slime) but there is no such thing as deevolution.
     
  4. Apr 14, 2003 #3
    The reversal of natural adaptation is imposed maladaptation. Such de-evolution would lead to the extermination of the species without artificial supports.
     
  5. Apr 14, 2003 #4

    FZ+

    User Avatar

    But that is not deevolution. Evolution is movement towards local highs of survivability. All you do is change the landscape of survivability. You do not reverse the process itself. Do you see the difference?
     
  6. Apr 14, 2003 #5
    Yes, I think I see. What I would differentiate is not evolution from de-evolution, but "natural" (inborn) from "unnatural" (artificial) adaptation.

    Which artifice will fastest outpace inborn adaptations?
     
  7. Apr 15, 2003 #6

    FZ+

    User Avatar

    Agriculture.
     
  8. Apr 15, 2003 #7
    Please explain - junk food, hybrid corn, radiated meat?
     
  9. Apr 15, 2003 #8

    FZ+

    User Avatar

    Not quite. I am saying that the discovery of agriculture itself has already greatly outpaced natural selectional pressures. With agriculture, man is immediately freed from the typical requirement to evolve lean, mean hunters, and with time, the high sense of reliability agriculture provides lessens the requirement for tolerant physiques. If after a few million years of agriculture, we decide to suddenly stop, we would not be able to survive in the same competitive niche that we once did, that we would still be in if we didn't begin farming.
     
  10. Apr 17, 2003 #9
    It seems ironic that agriculture, an immediate adaptation toward man's prosperous civilizations and increased survival, would cause him to alienate natural competition, the health of his crops and eventually his own well being.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?