Meaningless Ramble

Remove all ads!

I basically know almost next to nothing in-depth about science, history, etc. (Just a dumb high-school kid here, folks...nothing to see here, keep on moving!). But I'm just going to share my views anyway. Whew...glad to get that by me. My question is as thus: Have we evolved any at all during written history? People against evolution say, of course, "Where's the evolution?" Well, for one thing, you won't see it overnight because recognizable changes are millions of years in the making. And who's to say we've not been evolving a tad over the long roll of centuries? Come on, what's your definition of the word 'evolution', anyway? For example, take a look at the two Roman empires: Rome itself and the USA (it’s basically the new Roman Empire--or so said John Lennon). Anyway, ancient Rome had, at one point, what as a national pastime: feeding heretics to the lions and literally bashing skulls*? And now what does the “new Rome” have? Our most violent national pastime is considered to be football. Ha, now if that’s not an improvement in our humanity, then what is? *[I know, historically, more than many gladiator bouts ended without death, but there WAS enough of it to consider the sport and its fanfare a practice in barbarism.]

But we’ve got such a long way to go, people. Look around you; there are still wars, racism etc. (the list is a very long one, so I’ll refrain) We’re still bashing in each other’s skulls--still destroying ourselves (to small degrees). I hate to get on my pulpit, but hatred’s not the path to evolution. For example, if ancient Greece hadn’t have fallen, then, today, we’d be, maybe, 21 centuries ahead--as opposed to our current technology. And another thing: 500 years from now, how will 'they' view us? Further more, how do WE view people 500 years ago? Will we be thought of as members of a Dark Age or a renaissance? Will they say “I can’t believe they lived that way!”? We ourselves perceive the ignorance and prejudice shown to high degrees by past peoples and olden civilizations, long, long ago. But, when we become the “long ago”, will our prejudices and our ignorance be laid bare? I’m more than quite sure. But will it be as glaring as the ancient and recent past? No, because we’re slowly making progress, obviously.

I don’t know... I felt I had to let those thoughts off my chest. Take them with a grain of salt (or however that saying goes--I don't know exactly). I’m quite sure I’ve rambled to meaningless proportions, yes. Feel free to share your thoughts--or lambaste mine. Whichever! Whatever!

Ciao!

 

bzzzzzt. wrong. See, the driving force behind basically all evolution (you know, natural selection) is competition. In nature, that's typically competition to survive, not win a Ferrari. If you're talking about normal evolution, violence is what drives it. Isn't that a pleasant thing to think about?

Now, if you are talking about humanity's moral evolution-people suck. Always have, always will. There will always be war. there will always be murder. Well, unless God does get around to the Apocalypse, but how can you predict that?

 

I don't know how much is due to actual evolution (improvement of the gene pool due to individuals being selective in their breeding partners) or how much can be attributed to improvements in our understanding of how kids learn (and, therefore, how to teach), but it seems to me that young children are mastering basic skills like reading, arithmetic, and social interaction at much earlier ages that the Boomer generation did.

Do people actually suck? I don't think so, but there sure is a strong urge to look out for one's self-interest. That, I'm sure, won't be bred out of us any time soon.

 

BZZZZZZTTTT Bankroet Wrong...

Humankind is the only species which can hate eachother, violence between animals is not caused from hate, its caused from the will to survive, the strongest survives, the weakest dies.

Not really because of the gene evolution, more of the educational system evolution..
People learn bit by bit how the brain works, so it becomes easier to teach people stuff (read: brainwashing)..

On the other hand, in the Dark ages women got the "period" stuff while they were becoming 18, now at 12.. Thats sounds like an huge difference (for worse or good)

 

I have to correct you there, evolution is nothing about the strongest and weakest. That is an afterconstruction and misconception that has a firm hold in many minds.
Darwin said survival of the fittest. That means that the best adapted to a certain environment is most likely to survive and thrive. It is not a pitched battle between all individuals and all races but a race to be able to adapt and make the most of a given enviroment. We humans have both an edge and a weakness when it comes to this as we change our environment to fit us, not change ourselves to fit the environment. That ability has enabled humans as the more or less the only species on the planet to thrive and prosper in almost any environment. But at the same I think that it is bound to stunt our development.

 

I's all about clothes, I tell you. You see, if it weren't for clothes, there would be few suitable places for humans to live. And, some resources that we explore, could not be explored naked. And, for example, using a forge naked, wouldn't be very healthy, so it's all in the clothes. If any other species could make clothes...

Now, seriously, I think that the problem with this stuff is talking about "the best", the species who are alive and well nowadays have proven that they're not better than any other, just as well adapted to living as any other. So, humans are no better than bugs (and they say bugs can survive nuclear warfare).

About the new roman empire, I think that the US are as barbaric as any other ancient empire. Instead of using their money on social causes, they spend billions on weapowns. Not to mention, this ridiculous latest war against terrorism, I can't quite point out the economical or political intrest in this thing, but I'm sure the cause of it is not Saddam or Bin Laden. You see, Rome invaded many coutries, spreading their domains, well, America does the same, but economically, dominating through debts and economical threats. And as for violent sports: hunting? Ultimate fighting? Wrestling? It hasn't changed that much, has it?

 

hehe, most of you seem to have misinterpreted what evolution is about, though joacqin is more or less right.

if you want to clarify your understanding of evolution by natural selection, then read my second post in the following topic:

http://www.sorcerers.net/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=7;t=002331#000000

anyway, on topic... in terms of adaptive evolution, most data indicates that natural selection acting upon Homo sapiens sapiens has been 'relaxed' (is not a strong a force) compared to the majority of other organisms.

there are several theories for this (which may or may not be mutually exclusive), though the most likely contributors are man's small effective population size (i.e. though there are 6billion of us, the individuals that we can realistically come into contact with are in the order of magnitude of 10^3, and so there are only 1000s that each person is potentially able to reproduce with) and modern medicine (i.e. less fit 'weaker' individuals are not killed by things that would normally take their lives). this may, in part, explain why pathogens such as HIV and Plasmodium falciparum (malaria) are having such a disproportionate effect on our present-day overall population structure.

oh, and those 'bugs' are most likely to be cockroaches.

hope that helps you ramble less meaninglessly!

 

Evolution - changing to become a better life form - not neccessarily more advanced - but more suited to our needs and environment

I think our minds and society has evolved. Our technology has advanced. Physically - we have grown and changed.

The strongest survive - by wittling out the weak.

If we made a list of people we knew and went through their strengths and weaknessess we could probaly predict who would be stronger, then we could run through it further and see what it would take to beat them.

Humans thrive through competition as with all the the other animals. Humans are animals and we are the strangest of the lot. We attempt to control what is beyond our reach while we are in awe and fear of it. If we weren't afraid we would destroy what we need - or be destroyed.

Fear is both enemy and ally - as is everything else.

I think science tries to enforce evolution - implanting genes into unborn children and making 'designer babies' where the only point is to create perfection when we aren't even sure of the word. The only way we can understand 'Perfection' is to understand 'Utopia'

Utopia - Perfect World/Nothing

 

Exactly what I meant, I just used the wrong word, form your point of view that is..

 

Well, I have studied history quite extensively (9 years of university, and my first degree was a double major in History and Classics) and my sense is that we've advanced morally as a species a lot more than we usually give ourselves credit for. The ancient Athenians we so revere kept their women in a type of purdah, such as we only see in fundamentalist Muslim countries today. Medieval husbands had their wives' tongues cut out for gossiping. Slavery and child labour were not even controversial issues, but something everyone did, for almost all of human history.

Today? Racism is now a character flaw, not a widespread basis for a system of government. There is still murder and torture in the world, but it's a secret shameful thing now, deplored by nearly everyone except the tiny minority of perpetrators, instead of something the whole village brought their kids to watch over a picnic. We as a species have recently invented the nuclear bomb, but we also recently invented the concepts of human rights and animal welfare, novocaine, indoor plumbing, and aeroplanes. What will we invent next? Who knows, but I can't wait to see. I think our real challenge is not to grow complacent, but for each of us to strive every day to be the best people we can be.

 

I was waiting for you to show up, the god

You mention the active human gene pool for each individual's choice of partner must be chosen from 10^3 other individuals. Do you think this a cause of inbreed or rather genetic differentation from continet to continent? I would say that taken into account that the choice of 10^3 is much larger than most other mammal species, I'll hardly be frightened of reccesive deseases.
I'll leave my pack of raging horses at this until you clarify.

Viral DNA's have always had an edge over humanity. Now we are just medically aware of its presence. And not dying from tons of other things, naturally leaves viral DNA as number one bad guy. This is the shining side of the medical coin.
The dirty side is that, medical treatment is our own signature for degeneration. I concur. Since evolution is a cruel and harsh environment; helping the genetically "weak" to reproduce will eventually be our downfall. That is, untill you and I and the rest of the genetics world (You freak out with genes too, right? ) come with the fourth medical revolution.

The spiffy way to say it is;
WE live a better life. But Our offspring pays the bill with fishing from a dirty gene pool.

***
Oh and back to toppic. Yes William there is always a lust for power, when there is a race who gets necessity as a free ride. There is always a fight for survival if necessity isn't a free ride. It cannot be different. One day we may accidentally or fortunately end up with the same religion a loving society and an effective crime fighting.

Untill then. Pack you 12 gauge Shotgun and your antibiotics in the trunk, and roam down the highway. Cause this planet isn't safe yet. Wheter warfare is an evolutionary step back or forward is only a matter of how cynical you are- Aye?

****
Edit; To the rest of you. I am sorry but I don't know where to start commenting, so pardon me for not doing so. I'll only ask/comment random statements.

Joacqin. What is the difference between the idea of Strongest/weakest Vs. Fittest. Those who are most fit can easily be said to be strongest. That was a semantic low blow on Morgoth just to sound wise my dear sweede

8people: You sure say alot. You are sure we are evil us genetics? When have we reached Utopia. Is it when we can cure genetic deseases? is it when we prevent deseases or is it when we allow adults to give birth to healhty children or is it when deseases is no longer common in our vocabulary. You were awfully fast in your comments. I would appreciate a little depht.

[ December 04, 2002, 22:07: Message edited by: Nobleman ]

 

There's no point in talking about evolution amog humans is there? I mean, what causes the breeding among humans are not necessarily the best qualities for the species. If evolution does happen I believe it'll be at random, you know, not the best genes, but some genes. Unless we start a facist society like "Brave new world". hehehe. Nope, biological evolution won't happen, I believe, let's hope that social evolution happens someday.

 

Haven’t read all the replies yet but will... I know that evolution isn't exactly advances in our culture to higher states of technology/understanding/etc. But you know, I think what I was describing--evolution or not--...was something good. Whatever...I just couldn't find a word to describe it, so I grabbed for ‘evolution’. I guess I see mankind not evolving so much physically as mentally. But I will say one thing. As for hatred: I still haven't been swayed in my opinion. Oh, almost forgot. That opinion is that hatred simply slows us down. Person-to-person hatred might always be a factor (maybe not forever), but a society--nations--having indifference and hating another is a big no-no in my book. And I think religion is more than often interpreted--and, more importantly--wielded wrong. Religion is a good thing--it fills voids...questions--for some people. But religion is also one of the deadliest things/destructive things when used the wrong way (and it often and unknowingly is). I don't like the idea of anybody--or worse--any school of thought teaching us there will always be war, murders, etc. How will we ever evolve past all that if we have such a big voice as religion whispering it in our ears? You must understand those religious texts were written a long time ago in a very different time. Word-for-word, it is not the perfect standard to live by. But the morals and the basic message that comes across is. Yes, some things slow us down, and, to be quite frank, we need to let them loose. Not speaking of religion in general. Just speaking of all the ignorant practitioners of it. Violence is not the answer--understanding is. Okay, corny-sounding, I admit, but I'm a dreamer, see (hopefully I'm not the only one). One more Einstein quote and then I'm gone--vamoose.

"The further the spiritual evolution of mankind advances, the more certain it seems to me that the path to genuine religiosity does not lie through the fear of life, and the fear of death, and blind faith, but through striving after rational knowledge."

 

Oh yes, and for Nobleman: As for me being cynical...I don’t know, maybe I am. Cynicism is a good ingredient for many art forms, depending on the emotions you want it to convey. But I dunno. Unless you’ve really experienced war, you can’t much comment on it except from a limited, removed perspective. I know those who have fought, though (some in my family), and DEFINITELY know that the actual war itself is not a good thing. Wars do help the economies of those who win them, yes, if that’s what you were talking about in terms of “stepping forward”. If I’m wrong, correct me, though. Always open-minded about things and willing to listen... But aside from temporary economic boosts coming about I don’t see any more pros (well, heh, maybe it serves as population control--but I will only attest to that when I'm feeling morbid, heh).

[Double posting is only allowed in the Creativity Surge forum - BTA]

From William: All right, didn't know. Had to separate the two different facets of my post somehow. I'll remember that, and, next time, I'll just use "PS".

[ December 05, 2002, 03:09: Message edited by: William Smit IV ]

 

Hmm, I see what you mean and I agree. Religion is just an excuse to kill, like war on terrorism. I think people are violent out of lack of understanding, to others and themselves. And I mean it in general sense. People have problems and sometimes, when they can't solve them, they use violence to force a solution. I don't know, I think it can always be avoided. The problem is that violence is easy: if you're stronger, you can make the weaker party simply agree. Even when you got a problem in witch you cannot "beat", you can blame someone and beat this person. I don't know, I'm just "meaninglessly rambling".

 

It's all about Sex.

Good Lord, haven't any of you ever read a Evolutionary Psychology book?

 

nobleman! okay, i'll take those wild horses and raise you another pack...

assuming i've interpreted your first comment correctly, i don't see how the differences in the gene pools of allopatrically-separated populations would influence our Ne, the difference is more likely to be a consequence rather than a cause. if anything, knowing a reproductively-compatible population exists which is less likely to contain close relatives is more likely to increase our Ne as individuals will migrate between the populations.

for the inbreeding: though our Ne is small, humans seem to be relatively efficient at avoiding mating with their relatives (something to do with being able to smell each others' MHC antigens to estimate how genetically different we are perhaps? ). as for why we have small Ne, i think it's more to do with how our social interactions are more complicated than most animals. those interactions will impose restrictions on us being able to just travel around to meet new people. When we move to a new territory we need to find e.g. a job, place to live, friends etc in order to live a 'comfortable' life, and after humans find those things it ties them to the area they live in, and it's more difficult for us to move to a new place at the drop of a hat. for example, a solitary predator such as a tiger sleeps pretty much where they want (nothing f*cks with a tiger!) and only needs to find food and occasionally a one-night stand (though there being a dwindling number of tigers, that's probably not the best example!) however, i do concede that mammals in general have small Ne (somehow related to their biomass?), especially subterranean species who rarely meet other individuals of the same species during their lifetimes.

yeh, i freak out with genes too, though almost entirely from an evolutionary perspective. technically, as my main project is concerned with determining if/how selection is acting upon non-coding DNA, i suppose that i'm an evolutionary genomicist (testing/developing theories and writing bioinformatics programs, oh the joy!). btw, i like your 'spiffy' saying nobleman, i think i may steal it.

more on topic, ejsmith: i've heard you mention 'evolutionary psychology' a few times, what the hell is it?

 

Yes yes YES! Yoda Nods in agreement.

You Know about MHC receptors. Perhaps you are on to something. IT got me pondering. Perhaps when animals lick eachother and humans kiss not only do we try and stimulate each other, but we share vital genetic information. Perhaps the IgA that necessarily will be shared is the key for further hormonal stimulation. IgD might play a role as IgA's Keyhole. If they match too well an hormonal alarm clock goes off. The functions of IgD are at my knowledge unknown, so what the heck, Mother Nature must have had some intention with IgD. Its late and I am rambling. But please keep my imagination peaked.

And where is MethylViolet when you need her. Women

[ December 05, 2002, 23:08: Message edited by: Nobleman ]

 

Man, what is all this imunology stuff all about?

 

This sounds like a spinoff of Random Babbling Post...*all members of SP come and beat on me* Never mind, never mind. It's something else entirely. I get it now...