Evolution can someone explain?

Question

I am not the sharpest tool in the shed and didn`t pay much attention in class,so this is what I want to know.
As I see it evolution favors some but not all, most people I know are way smarter than me and some of them like to show it big time,so has evolution made super thinking people and not so smart people like me, I mean is evolution selective to the point of discrimination?

Instigator you are very rude,are you alway`s this irritating.

Zidane why do you enjoy insulting me,I mean no harm.

Answer 1

Evolution can't exist because your life would be meaningless. There would be no morals and justice would be non-existent in the hearts of men. Everything would not have dualities. How could everything so integrated in harmony, in complete balance and cooperation be the result of Evolution? It must have been created from a higher power. God.

Answer 2

Evolution really favors no one. Evolution says that certain aspects of being a human, or any species, favor survival and the survival of children. Humans have many aspects, one of which is intelligence.

Smarter people are favored under some circumstances, but not others. More compassionate people are favored under some circumstances but not others. Stronger people are favored under some circumstances, but not others.

Evolution is not discrimination, it is the explanation of discrimination. Women pick men with characteristics they find attractive. What is interesting is we know those characteristics seem to favor the well being of children. Still, most people find a mate at some point. We know men choose along characteristics that imply females are healthy, hence the desire for younger women. Men seek women who will tend to survive childbirth on multiple occaisions.

In fact, there is an interesting observation about much older men and young women. Men who have survived to old age generally have more resources and have proven their genes healthy. The reverse isn't true because older women cannot reproduce. There is a genetic advantage to species who terminate female reproduction. Not only are they genetically more stable, but they permit the existence of "grandmothers." A grandmother permits a mother to work productively after she has aged and is less productive by allowing a birth mother to work, while grandma takes care of the children. Further, the grandmother can send her genes forward even better by being involved in the lives of the grandchildren.

Answer 3

Well I'll tell you right now, you're not dumb. I'm not being dishonest, if you want to see dumb people hang around this forum for 5 minutes and look at the spelling and grammar of some of the questions.

People being smart or dumb isn't evolution though you might say it's the fuel of evolution... a fuel we don't 'burn'. Before I take that analogy too far, let me explain it like this. For humans to evolve towards higher intelligence takes mutation, this gives all kinds of people, some smarter, some dumber, some average and so on. For evolution to work on these there would have to be selection - eg DEATH. If stupid people tended to die before they had children the average iq would rise (ignoring the fact that iq is calculated as the average but lets not be pedantic).

If you have mutations but just about everyone surviving with good and bad genes, then what you have is more like genetic drift, or neutral evolution. For example, I wear eyeglasses. I may still have a chance to replicate my dna because this defect has not caused me any severe problems. 100,000 years ago my friends might have spotted a sabretooth cat and I might have been eaten before I figured out what they were running for. So you can bet that fewer cavemen needed glasses than people in modern societies. Ideas to 'improve' humanity are considered taboo because of the bad reputation eugenics got. We tend not to want to follow the lessons of people like Hitler.

Evolution then does discriminate (though its a mistake to think something like evolution cares - its just a law of nature), in that those lines of descent least able to survive and replicate their genes will tend to go extinct. Nature isn't nice though.

Answer 4

You need to consider evolution as a natural process rather than evolution with mans intervention. If nature were allowed to function normally then the not-so-smart individual would not survive long or at least not long enough to propogate since all the women would want their child from the smartest or best hunter. Man interviened and the not-so-smart person was protected as well as the disabled. It is an indication of the quality of us as a species as to how well we take care of those who are not as able to take care of themselves as others. The disabled are allowed to live, Stephen Hawkins a good example, and the not so smart are allowed an almost normal space in our society. Some haven't thought that was a good idea at different times.

Answer 5

*Sigh*

Natural selection is discriminating. It favors those who are best suited for linging in a particular environment and naturally eliminates those who are less able to survive by death. If exceptionally smart people were to reproduce more often and successfully than not-so-smart people, then there would be a lot more smart people several generations down the line.

However, there is not much selection pressure on humanity right now--except for population complications and, of course, each other.

Evolution affects species over generations, not individuals. What is important is whether or not you reproduce and make more successfully reproducing progeny. That's it.

Answer 6

Natural variation occurs... so of course people of various intelligences arise.

Don't get down on yourself, are you sure you're dumb? Maybe your friends just read a lot... knowledge does not make you smart, it makes you knowledgeable.

Back to evolution... wouldn't it be strange if everyone had exactly the same intelligence? Actually thats about what it would be like if God made man... but since people arose from biological evolution, it would be strange for everyone's brain to function at the exact same level.

Answer 7

Evolution does not "favor" anybody. You can be smart, you can be dumb. But statistically, over long periods of time, organisms that can survive to pass on their genes will do so and their offspring will tend to inherit their characteristics.

But evolution is not moving towards super-people. That is a fallacy.

Answer 8

Primoa, I'll agree with the first part of that.

honestly, I feel that right now, evolution may be favoring less brain power among humans. We've managed to prevent herd-culling among our species with our advances in medical technology. I don't necessarily see this as a bad thing, just interesting.

Answer 9

"Discrimination" implies that there is judgement involved. Evolution is a process. Processes do not judge, they merely occur. You might as well ask whether erosion chose to make the Grand Canyon.

Answer 10

If we were a nonsocial species, completely dependent on our own abilities to survive, then the less intelligent would have died off years ago. But we are not that kind of species. We depend on each other. We each have a role to play. We take care of each other (when we're not killing each other) and thus the intelligent and the unintelligent both survive.

Answer 11

Not really the more kids you have the more successful you are in evolution terms. The amount of kids people have is actually lower for intelligent people then in dumbass like yourself.