Evolving Darwinism

[quote]Flow wrote:
Spry wrote:
Flow wrote:
Moving around is supposed to be an intrinsic element of being a human…

Or is it?

Just plug me into the Matrix, baby.

good call on the correction :)[/quote]

I wonder also. Is it better to work a white collar job that requires some brain power and then devote an hour or so a day to intense phyiscal training?

Would both my mind and body not be better if I did this rather than a menial job?

Is this evolution on the small scale? Working in an office! Eeek. What have we done?!

[quote]Vash wrote:
“Civilized men tend to be more rude because, as a general rule, they are less likely to have their heads opened.” - Robert E. Howard.

I’m not overly impressed by our current civilization. Of course, I say this in an air-conditioned apartment, whilst typing on a wireless keyboard, watching the text appear on my LCD HDTV used as a monitor, on a collection of information channels that puts the Library of Alexandria to shame.

To the original topic, I don’t have a clue. As much as I want physique and intellect to be equally prized, it’s not, and as long as it’s not essential for the weakest among us, it’s not going to be.

Bring on the anarchy . . . which would require a utopian societal interaction. Fuck it.

Give everyone a club, some cocaine, and an hour.

anthropocentric wrote:
Civility OG?

I think this has been an integral part of human evolution in the first place.

It is the social group dynamics that have allowed humans to advance as a species. While we have civility within our society, there still remains enemies whose death would be applauded by almost all Americans (Think Osama).

Social evolution occurs as we learn more and more about humanity…the persistent social psychologists that study persuasion, the Frank Luntz’s of the world that give political issues more precedence by a simple reframing of the argument or wordplay, and everyone else who strives to reach their top potential.

Some evolutionists think that human brains will continue to grow disproportionately to their bodies as the importance of intelligence manifests itself in society.

However, there is no doubt in my mind that physical aptitude and a muscular stature will remain a symbol of strength that garners respect with a mere millisecond glance.

When you find people that have physical charm, charisma, and intelligence all in one package, you will know they have the potential to be one of the greats.

[/quote]

Vash, man you would be fun at a party.

Part of the talk at work was who would you rather have with you after an upheaval of epic, planet-wide proportions, the mental giant or the physical giant. I am a shallow gal and I said, I want to be with the physical giant with the mental giant on a leash.

We can speculate but we don’t know what such a catclysm would bring about.

but like debraD mentioned, most significant changes do occur in states of unrest or dissatisfaction. If you are happy or content you typically don’t change things. I think media and food is the new opiate of the masses and they get dispensed pretty cheaply and easily right now so I don’t really see a change in sight.

[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:
Part of the talk at work was who would you rather have with you after an upheaval of epic, planet-wide proportions, the mental giant or the physical giant. I am a shallow gal and I said, I want to be with the physical giant with the mental giant on a leash.
[/quote]

Are you thinking what I’m thinking?

A bevy of amazonian girls who obeyed me without question and can hunt lions for me.

Also, for the most part, intelligence, physical ability and social skills need to be honed in order to be realized and won’t show up just because of genetics.

That being the case, who has enough time in their life to hone all of these skills? I think we all have far more potential then we’ll ever realize in our lifetime and some people are lucky enough to be able reach their limits in one aspect or another but only a few will ever be able to find them all.

But that doesn’t mean the potential isn’t sitting there in the genes of an obese, uneducated jerk waiting for a reason to show up.

[quote]Spry wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:
Part of the talk at work was who would you rather have with you after an upheaval of epic, planet-wide proportions, the mental giant or the physical giant. I am a shallow gal and I said, I want to be with the physical giant with the mental giant on a leash.

Are you thinking what I’m thinking?

A bevy of amazonian girls who obeyed me without question and can hunt lions for me.
[/quote]

hhhmmmmm you know… not quite what I had pictured.

But if it motivates you to change the world! YOU DO IT SPRY! I’m a little short to be an amazon, but I think I could bring down a zebra if I had to.

[quote]debraD wrote:
Also, for the most part, intelligence, physical ability and social skills need to be honed in order to be realized and won’t show up just because of genetics. That being the case, who has enough time in their life to hone all of these skills?

I think we all have far more potential then we’ll ever realize in our lifetime and some people are lucky enough to be able reach their limits in one aspect or another but only a few will ever be able to find them all. But that doesn’t mean the potential isn’t sitting there in the genes of an obese, uneducated jerk waiting for a reason to show up.[/quote]

So you are thinking more in terms of what you can develop within a lifespan?

That is an interesting question, but as you point out, each individual would be responsible for that.

I do agree about the potential not be exploited near enough. When I read Bauer’s schedule my jaw dropped. I don’t want his schedule, but it made me think of moments I probably could have been doing more.

My thoughts were more of projecting out 1000 years from now. Though really, it might not have an impact on me…

[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:
Spry wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:
Part of the talk at work was who would you rather have with you after an upheaval of epic, planet-wide proportions, the mental giant or the physical giant. I am a shallow gal and I said, I want to be with the physical giant with the mental giant on a leash.

Are you thinking what I’m thinking?

A bevy of amazonian girls who obeyed me without question and can hunt lions for me.

hhhmmmmm you know… not quite what I had pictured.

But if it motivates you to change the world! YOU DO IT SPRY! I’m a little short to be an amazon, but I think I could bring down a zebra if I had to.

[/quote]

Considering I’m 5’6" you’d probably make a good amazonian girl for me.

The point was for me to be the smartest so as to control the bevy.

But with you onboard I will likely end up being your slave as you and the other amazonian girls hunt game and have lesbian sex.

Then again, as long as I can watch I could live with that.

(Note to self: When the end of the world comes - Don’t trust OG. Find bevy of girls.)

[quote]Spry wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:
Spry wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:
Part of the talk at work was who would you rather have with you after an upheaval of epic, planet-wide proportions, the mental giant or the physical giant. I am a shallow gal and I said, I want to be with the physical giant with the mental giant on a leash.

Are you thinking what I’m thinking?

A bevy of amazonian girls who obeyed me without question and can hunt lions for me.

hhhmmmmm you know… not quite what I had pictured.

But if it motivates you to change the world! YOU DO IT SPRY! I’m a little short to be an amazon, but I think I could bring down a zebra if I had to.

Considering I’m 5’6" you’d probably make a good amazonian girl for me.

The point was for me to be the smartest so as to control the bevy.

But with you onboard I will likely end up being your slave as you and the other amazonian girls hunt game and have lesbian sex.

Then again, as long as I can watch I could live with that.

(Note to self: When the end of the world comes - Don’t trust OG. Find bevy of girls.)[/quote]

hehehe at the end of the world, I am going to have on CFM shoes, perfume and be carrying a leash.

then I take over the world.

In Guns Germs and Steel Diamond posits that since the beginning of agriculture and civilization the strongest selection pressure on humans has been pandemic disease.

[quote]etaco wrote:
In Guns Germs and Steel Diamond posits that since the beginning of agriculture and civilization the strongest selection pressure on humans has been pandemic disease.[/quote]

disease has always influenced history and evolution. Look at sickle cell anemia. It mostly affects the african population as the irregular shape of the blood cell makes it impossible for the malaria parasite to find a host.

This genetic disorder was caused by a disease in one part as a benefit, but also as a detriment.

That is a significant adaptation to a parasite, I don’t know what the effect would be of immunities. Or really, I don’t know of other adaptations along that line.

I don’t see a benefit to the rH factor, but the Basque population has the highest density of people with that factor, upwards of 30%. What would the benefit of that be?

[quote]Spry wrote:
Flow wrote:
Spry wrote:
Flow wrote:
Moving around is supposed to be an intrinsic element of being a human…

Or is it?

Just plug me into the Matrix, baby.

good call on the correction :slight_smile:

I wonder also. Is it better to work a white collar job that requires some brain power and then devote an hour or so a day to intense phyiscal training?

Would both my mind and body not be better if I did this rather than a menial job?

Is this evolution on the small scale? Working in an office! Eeek. What have we done?![/quote]

Our means of ‘progress’ (organic and inorganic technologies) are accelerating so much that our genetics can’t keep up. Living the normal life is becoming more and more unhealthy for our biology.

That said, the life expectancy of developed areas is greatly improved from past times’, but it seems like people are inadvertently missing out on some of the great health benefits that technology can provide. Where do we draw the line? :stuck_out_tongue:

[quote]Flow wrote:

Our means of ‘progress’ (organic and inorganic technologies) are accelerating so much that our genetics can’t keep up. Living the normal life is becoming more and more unhealthy for our biology.

That said, the life expectancy of developed areas is greatly improved from past times’, but it seems like people are inadvertently missing out on some of the great health benefits that technology can provide. Where do we draw the line? :P[/quote]

that is close to my original question. When do we wean ourselves off the next best tool or chemical? Do we deny ourselves the easy way or the prolonging?

There is a misconception about what genetic fitness means. It is measured by the number of offspring you have.

[quote]Kreal7 wrote:
There is a misconception about what genetic fitness means. It is measured by the number of offspring you have.[/quote]

If you mean viable, then that can be a standard of measure.

I wasn’t actually discussing evolution with a focus on “best suited” or even, in your measure of “assured future progeny”, but more of should we make a conscious effort now to influence the valuation of physicality or intelligence?

and again, not that it would have to be exclusive.

more of a social evolution which might lead to physical or mental adaptation.

[quote]zephead4747 wrote:
I just think stupid people are having too many kids.[/quote]

I agree with this. You’ll see the smart more educated people stick to the 1-3 kids range (read: enough to replace themselves) whereas the less educated people tend to have LOTS of kids, and seem to think the vagina is akin to a clown car.

Or perhaps people with smaller wangs just hump more. Hell, look at the two largest populations in the world.

(ducks)

[quote]Kreal7 wrote:
There is a misconception about what genetic fitness means. It is measured by the number of offspring you have.[/quote]

Hardly. Any retard can stick their junk in a hoo-hah. You have to factor in being able to raise said offspring to integrate successfully into society.

[quote]Kreal7 wrote:
There is a misconception about what genetic fitness means. It is measured by the number of offspring you have.[/quote]

More technically, it’s the number of offspring who then survive long enough to successfully reproduce themselves.

[quote]Makavali wrote:
Kreal7 wrote:
There is a misconception about what genetic fitness means. It is measured by the number of offspring you have.

Hardly. Any retard can stick their junk in a hoo-hah. You have to factor in being able to raise said offspring to integrate successfully into society.[/quote]

Nope. Retards can be genetically successful. So can serial rapists. Genghis Khan? In terms of genetics, the man won, okay? And he wasn’t the least bit worried about “integrating” his offspring into society.

[quote]Qthulhu wrote:
Kreal7 wrote:
There is a misconception about what genetic fitness means. It is measured by the number of offspring you have.

More technically, it’s the number of offspring who then survive long enough to successfully reproduce themselves.

[/quote]

and in regards to that, when viable offspring are produced with artificial assistance or in instances where no offspring were likely to happen, is this a good or bad thing?

our intellect has made it possible for those not physically able to procreate on their own, or even to be attractive to the opposite sex for the purpose of procreation, to now procreate.

so… if faced with a decision for the betterment of mankind do you continue with the methods of “whatever tools/drugs/accessories are needed and can be used, use” or do you decide, “if you are individually capable”.

[quote]Qthulhu wrote:
Makavali wrote:
Kreal7 wrote:
There is a misconception about what genetic fitness means. It is measured by the number of offspring you have.

Hardly. Any retard can stick their junk in a hoo-hah. You have to factor in being able to raise said offspring to integrate successfully into society.

Nope. Retards can be genetically successful. So can serial rapists. Genghis Khan? In terms of genetics, the man won, okay? And he wasn’t the least bit worried about “integrating” his offspring into society.

[/quote]

Is Ghengis Khan retarded or a serial rapist?