Do you believe we as people should continue with the Ideas of Survival of the Fittest, and Natural Selection ? Should we close hospitals, put the elderly out to pasture. Are we not, by assisting the weak, poisoning our race ? If you wish to discuss, feel free.
( side note ) If you take a highschool, split them into physically Strongest and weakest (jocks to nerds). It's kind of ironic that the weakest would end up being scientists.
2006-12-08 10:27:38 · 15 answers · asked by carkegaard 2 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
first of all...for all of you that pegged me as a Christian nice try. just because I asked a question about Evolution, it doesn't mean I believe in God. I'm just sick of all the bickering between the two sides. I think anyone who puts all their faith into a theory, is foolish. Teach both teach neither who cares.... And today the fittest, are the Rich, and the Poor are being left behind.
2006-12-08 10:48:37 · update #1
fleshin...whatever your name is... I don't have a belief to be sided to, my belief is the entire matter is trivial. If I'm a child of god or a monkey, my life will be the same. And honestly you'll never change each others minds so why bother... let them keep their faith, and you you're rational theory and call it a day .
2006-12-08 10:54:38 · update #2
I got brains (better ones through evolution) and I use them accordingly. You should too.
I'm a Christian by the way, so why insisting always on creating an unnatural, unnecessary and unfortunate division between believers (supposedly all adhering to Creationism) and non-believers (supposedly all adhering to Evolutionism).
Life is not black and white, there's always a big gray area.
2006-12-08 10:50:00 · answer #1 · answered by Yuri 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You question implies an old understanding of "Survival of the fittest" and natural selection. For decades scientists have demonstrated that species survival has been assisted by cooperative efforts. This is essentially derrived from thinkers like John Nash's work ("A Beautiful Mind"). In fact evolution tends towards cooperative solutions over competative because it increases everyone's probability of successful reproduction of those involved. This has been modelled by game theorists and social theorists and is demonstrated at every level of biology. Some books on the topic are listed.
2006-12-08 10:44:41 · answer #2 · answered by One & only bob 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
You sound confused. Natural selection explains the process by which organic life adapts or goes extinct. Human existence is a unique case of organic life, because we share a collective conscious that lower forms, like viruses, do not. Moral judgment is an outgrowth of the collective conscious, and thus survial of the fittest theory has no moral implications.
2006-12-08 10:37:01 · answer #3 · answered by kirbyguy44 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
It doesn't favor the strongest all the time. It favors the ones that are most likely to survive, so that could be the smartest too. Humans are relatively weak physically compared to most species. If you had to fight a tiger without your brains, you would lose. But because we have brains you know how to make and use weapons.
Hospitals are another extension of that. They make it more likely that the species as a whole can survive.
2006-12-08 10:37:12 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
"Choose evolution"? I didn't choose it; it happened.
Believing in evolution does not require lack of compassion.
Putting the elderly out to pasture would have no effect evolutionarily.
No, by curing diseases, fixing broken bones, or removing appendices (to name a few examples), we are not poisoning our race.
If you want, you could actually learn about evolution, rather than creating bogus ideas of what you think it means.
Your side note is a stereotype not at all supported by evidence.
But then, if you don't accept evolution, you don't much care about evidence, truth, reality, or fact, do you?
2006-12-08 14:01:34 · answer #5 · answered by tehabwa 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think Christians should go to a faith hospital instead of a using evolutionary medicine science backed hospital and put their faith in God to heal them rather than nasty atheist scientists. Next time a member of your family is seriously ill take them to your church and have them treated there!
As far as your second point goes its a stereotype, you've watched too many teen movies!
2006-12-08 10:34:05 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Evolution is not a moral code, and fitness is not always what it seems. Evolution exists at the social level, not just the biological level. Social contracts are far more powerful than genes.
2006-12-08 11:35:33 · answer #7 · answered by novangelis 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
if you have a point of view that you want people to agree with you on, and you dont really want to give the alternative viewpoint a fair hearing, do you think you should frame the question in a slanted way in order to shape the answer? or do you think you should seek genuine and honest discussion when you're not afraid to face the truth?
2006-12-08 10:42:46 · answer #8 · answered by justfleshnblud 2 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Evolution is solely a mechanism. It has nothing to say about the ethics and morals of human compassion.
You choose that God designed you, and you have the capability in your upper body (that he designed) to beat the everloving crap out of every person who rejects God. Why don't you do so? He obviously gave you the tools to do so?
That is how stupid your question is.
2006-12-08 10:32:18 · answer #9 · answered by QED 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋
You don't understand natural selection. It's not just survival of the fittest person, but the fittest species. And the fittest species and group acts altruistically toward its members.
2006-12-08 10:31:32 · answer #10 · answered by STFU Dude 6 · 5⤊ 1⤋