Warning: a number = a being.
1 has 2 and 3 as children.
2 is stronger than 1 and 3 is weaker than 1.
2 kills 3, then 2 has 4 and 5 as children.
4 is stronger than 2 and 5 is weaker than 2.
4 kills 5, then 4 has 6 and 7 as children.
...and so on...
Is it what I am thinking?
2006-10-23 08:05:45 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
The Darwinian notion of "survival of the fittest" isn't really about individuals, it's about traits. Survival of the fittest doesn't mean that the strong kill the weak, it means that those traits best suited for survival in a given set of circumstances will, over the course of generations, come to dominate, while those traits poorly suited to the surroundings will disappear.
Take the Key deer. By the simplistic interpretation of "survival of the fittest," larger stronger deer should prevail over smaller ones. Yet in the isolated environment of the Florida Keys, where the available food supply was limited, smaller deer won out because they could survive more effectively with less food.
Brute strength and aggression are not necessarily evolutionary advantages, and it is a mistake to interpret Darwin in that way.
As to the "end" of evolution, there is no end. Evolution is not a directed process, and it has no particular "goal." It's direction cannot be predicted, as we cannot predict the circumstances that any given species will face in the future, and what forces will shape its evolution.
2006-10-23 08:14:21 · answer #1 · answered by x 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Actually, 1 had 2, 3 and 4 as children. See Genesis 3 & 4.
2006-10-23 15:08:43 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Evolution does not involve patricide, fratricide, or any kind of murder. Instead, it involves traits. Strength is one trait, intelligence is another, keenness of eyesight or hearing is another. Evolution involves the interaction with the environment. If these creatures continue to murder one another, the entire species will die out because evolutionary success is defined as increasing in population. While your beings are busy in-fighting, there's another creature capitalizing on their distraction by taking the food and reproducing like crazy.
2006-10-23 15:21:11 · answer #3 · answered by NHBaritone 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
From what I've seen, evolution has slowed down. Right now we are no longer restrained by nature, but we still depend on natural resources. Perhaps once we stop depending on nature, then evolution will stop working. It's about natural selection.
2006-10-23 17:38:56 · answer #4 · answered by David D 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I am thinking that you do not understand evolution by natural selection.
2006-10-23 15:20:05 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋