English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

i know this is true for the animals...but doesnt this hold true for human also..i mean the diseased people are always living in misery, the poor people who cant earn much are always sad..while the rich famous and the goodlooking have the best in life...people with autism dont have achance in this life to compete with the other people..fat people cant live their lives happily..just because they are fat. So only the people who are by socety'd standards considered fit survive happily...

Isnt it sad but true...what are your opinions on this?

I know happiness is all in the mind...but this thought just struck my mind....?

2007-07-21 09:52:51 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities Philosophy

9 answers

You've misunderstood the quote. The quote is a simplification of the idea that those best adapted to an environment will survive as a species. You misunderstood "fittest" to mean best physical shape, when the proper connotation is "having the best fit".

But this applies to a population, not an individual. So survival is defined on a generational level, not an individual level.

So being "fat" for example, is not necessarily meaningful to this idea. If the environment favors intelligence, then physical girth is less important, and you can have a population with a variety of shapes.

And there are members of the population that, if not cared for by the larger successful part of the population, would probably not survive more than one or two generation. But they are part of it, so they do survive. They survive because they "fit" the successful population.

2007-07-21 10:16:35 · answer #1 · answered by freebird 6 · 3 0

Happiness is a point of view...many of those who are celebrities and are rich are often unhappy and suicidal (i.e, Brittny Spears) As far a survival, i think our society today allows those with autism and other disorders the chance to survive, but i think you have to look at the "survival of the fittest" idea in the long term. Maybe over many thousands of years. Not in one or two generations. Since we are living organisms, I'd have to imagine that we are changing. Maybe some type of world crisis will speed the process up?

2007-07-21 10:34:33 · answer #2 · answered by Mike R 2 · 1 0

Yes I believe this applies to humans as well as animals. Natural selection holds the promise that fit people will breed more fit people and therefore contribute to makeing the human population stronger. But you wouldnt think this considering that by 2012 75% of the US population will be over weight. This is a very good question.

2007-07-21 11:12:17 · answer #3 · answered by lolainya 2 · 0 0

The so called "survival of the fittest" is actually the requirement that a creature or anything for that matter, only exist sufficiently long enough to reproduce. The environment tailors life in this manner. As long as the environment allows lifeforms to exist, they will exist.

2007-07-21 10:09:44 · answer #4 · answered by Sophist 7 · 0 0

I can think of examples that contradict this notion even in the animal kingdom. Unfortunately, we tend to accept what we are told and taught without actually testing if these things are true.

Some terrorists are extremely fit and dead. Some soldiers are extremely fit and have been killed in combat. Healthy and fit people die all of the time through accidents. The same is true of the animal world.

Don't believe everything that you've been told.

2007-07-21 10:00:42 · answer #5 · answered by guru 7 · 2 0

like survival of the fittest? i think initally it was but know the government forces people who are surviving the best (educated, earning money) to give money to not so surviving people. we have so much medicine out there that to cure alot and we will cure everything soon. that doesnt have to do with happiness but it was fun to write

2007-07-21 12:01:14 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

A class I took once described human consciousness as "the biggest mistake evolution ever made". We have changed the meaning of fittest and can now manipulate nature to conform to our concepts. I think that is why it is still important for us to question and grow in the realm of ethics as well as in the realm of physics.

2007-07-21 10:09:57 · answer #7 · answered by Sowcratees 6 · 3 0

i am sick, poor, unfit/fat and happy. just thought i'd let you know that some of us not only survive ; but flourish spiritually, in spite of these things. can anyone else out there say the same?

2007-07-21 10:14:19 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

Unfortunately, the fittest survives...it is true for people, too...not only for animals...so I think that we need to learn how to get tougher...stronger and wiser...

2007-07-21 10:06:59 · answer #9 · answered by dias 4 · 1 1

fedest.com, questions and answers