Evolution : Where are we headed to

by bioflex 50 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  botchtowersociety

  Since most children survive to reproductive age independent of the parents abilities, I would suggest we are selecting towards simply having more children.

  The evidence is against your statement, I think. Places that have the highest survival rates also have the lowest birth rates. On the other hand, the opposite is also true. Where we see lower survival rates, we also see higher birth rates. Some countries with high survival rates have had their native birth rates drop below replacement levels. The U.S. is barely positive--which I attribute to immigration from countries where the survival rates are still low by comparison. Culture takes some time to adapt.
• 

  NewChapter

  From an evolutionary standpoint though, it's all the same. If there is a high birthrate, but only 2 survive to reproduce, that is exactly the same as only having 2 children that both survive to reproduce.

  The issue is not how many offspring are born, but how many live to reproduce themselves. That's reproductive success.

  NC
• 

  bohm

  BTS: Im not claiming any adaption has taken place, i simply suggest that if an allelle arose which caused us to have more children (which i think is plausible), i think there would be strong selective preasure in its favor.

  this is completely moot if our child-bearing habbits are entirely learned, but i dont think that is the case.
• 

  botchtowersociety

  NC. Humans do not blindly act based purely on a personal evolutionary reproductive success. Few advanced social animals do, as a matter of fact--and this is especially true of humans.
• 

  botchtowersociety

  BTS: Im not claiming any adaption has taken place, i simply suggest that if an allelle arose which caused us to have more children (which i think is plausible), i think there would be strong selective preasure in its favor.

  But, as I mentioned early on the thread, the real power is not in the genetic adaptations any longer, the real power is in the memetic ones. Highly reproductive demographic sub-groups don't have any unique genetic difference from the larger population. It is all memetic.
• 

  bohm

  BTS: ofcourse not, but it would seem to me that wanting to have children has a biological element to it. If that is the case, it is easy to imagine that element could be enchanced.

  for instance, we do not blindly act upon our feeling of wanting fatty, salty or sweet food. But it does guide our behaviour.
• 

  botchtowersociety

  Agreed.
• 

  NewChapter

  NC. Humans do not blindly act based purely on a personal evolutionary reproductive success. Few advanced social animals do, as a matter of fact--and this is especially true of humans.

  No, no, that's not what I was saying. I'm simply saying that to have an impact on evolution, quantity of offspring is less important than quality. They must survive to reproduction to impact evolution. To us as humans, our children mean much more to us than their impact on the gene pool. That's why we have medicine. Memetics!

  NC
• 

  sizemik

  this is completely moot if our child-bearing habbits are entirely learned, but i dont think that is the case.

  This is a distinction I find an over simplification . . . that evolution is blind and independent of concious intelligent thought and "learned" behaviour . . . as if there is the "natural" world and "our" world existing as seperate entities independent of each other.

  What we quickly label "learned" behaviour is not necessarily "unnatural" and totally independent of evolutionary influences. Humans are a natural consequence of evolution . . . so all of their behaviour is essentially a natural consequence of evolution too . . . even if it appears "learned" or the product of conscious thought.
• 

  NewChapter

  Interesting point Sizemik. Apes also have to learn "natural' behaviors. If an ape does not observe childcare, it never learns how to take care of a child. They used to have this problem in zoos. Now they have learned that it is best to let mama take care of the babe, so that when the babe matures, it knows how to tend to their own child. Is this too "unnatural"?

  They also learn many any skills that are not instinctive. I've talked about some of them, but won't list them here. Yet they fascinate me.

  NC