Natural selection doesn't have a "purpose". It merely has consequences. Those who reproduce, pass their genes on to a future generation. Those who don't, don't.
In more general terms, I believe your purpose is what you choose it to be. Most of us find plenty of purpose in life, doing things besides just reproducing!
2006-10-06 12:35:44
·
answer #1
·
answered by Bramblyspam 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
Where did you get that biology book that promotes species selection? Aside from that, though, you are victim of a common fallacy; confusing ultimate and proximate causation. When someone saves a friend, or a relative, due to genetic prompting, it is unconscious, ultimate, effect of the genes. What is done in the here and now; proximately, can be an overshoot, or even a conscious choice to act altruistically. Do not confuse the motives of your genes with your own motives. The motives of the genes are probabilistic; your motives can be circumstantial. Purpose comes from within and you do not need a soul to have purpose.If your only goad to puposeness was the promise of immortality, think in the moment and live one day at a time.
2006-10-06 13:16:25
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I'm a biologist, but let me start by telling you this: the purpose of life is not to reproduce, because you can abstain from it. If that were the purpose, people would HAVE TO do it. Also, I truly believe that people have sould, because even when we control brain waves, the person knows that whatever happened from the effects wasn't caused by them.
I would recomend you read a book called "The Case for A Creator" by Lee Strobel, or "In Six Days" by Dr. John F. Ashton. Also, there are some holes in the theory of evolution, and so I don't accept it as fact. Surely I accept natural selection, but that doesn't do what evolution does.
For example, in newer versions of Miller Experiments, no one adds oxygen, cuz that would oxidize everything and life couldn't have appeared. However if there was no oxygen, there was no ozone (O3) so the ammonia and methane would have been torn apart by UV rays. So if there was Oxygen, nothing would evolve, if there wasn't, nothing would evolve. :)
Good luck
2006-10-06 12:38:35
·
answer #3
·
answered by robertscienceguy@gmail.com 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
If there's a purpose to life then, yes, it's more life. Note, though, that overpopulation can actually be a detriment to the continued survival of a population, so merely increasing reproduction rates does not necessarily serve that purpose.
There is no evidence of anything like a soul. It's an invented concept used to try and explain death & make it less scary. The mind is not a seperate thing from the body either - it's what the brain does.
2006-10-06 12:45:40
·
answer #4
·
answered by John's Secret Identity™ 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
The first order of business of any species is to simply survive, then as a seconday, to perpetuate the species. After all one cannot reproduce if one cannot properly protect themselves. I'm betting the person who wrote your biology book never saved anyone. The first person I ever saved was a complete stranger.
2006-10-06 12:35:53
·
answer #5
·
answered by cabjr1961 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
Yes, the primary purposes of ALL life on earth, including humans, is to survive and reproduce, helping to insure the survival of the species. And that strong purpose makes us do a LOT of the things we do -- social structures, dating, mating, motivation for many of our actions.
There is no biological evidence of any kind that there is a "soul" or anything like it. As far as biology is concerned, you're you while you're alive, and when you're dead that's it, no more you.
2006-10-06 12:35:59
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
The purpose of life is to survive and make sure one's species survives and evolves.
2006-10-06 12:35:21
·
answer #7
·
answered by Drake ☮ 5
·
0⤊
1⤋