Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

social darwinism and survival of the fittest

aspekxaspekx Member UncommonPosts: 2,167

every time i read a poster responding to a thread using the terms "darwinism", "survival of the fittest", etc., i honestly cringe.

 

why? because sadly, more than half the time it appears that your biology professors or teachers have seriously failed some of you. what a lot of people promote when using these phrases is what's known as 'social darwinism' which is in reality a hackneyed 19th century attempt to keep laborers, women, racial minorities, and the poor "in their place".

 

don't misunderstand me there is a lot of peer reviewed literature on social evolution. on the nature of evolution as it is worked out not only in single members of a species or even groups within that species, but the species as a whole. see, it is not in the best interest of any species for everyone to follow Richard Dawkins' theories concerning the 'selfish gene'. E.O. Wilson, a scientist who will actually be remembered for his scientific work, in extensive research and the formulation of theories concerning social evolution, has maintained for some time that social interaction, social support of the group by it's various members, is the primary preferred method of keeping a species alive.

 

and he is not alone. one of the earlier books on the topic prepared for a layman's audience was a book entitled Unto Others. the first chapter alone is worth it in its examples of the clearly evolutionary, and not metaphysical or philosophical, origins of what we refer to as altruism. in other words there are certain members of species, sometimes all members, that are genetically programmed to give their lives for the whole.

 

to clarify a finer point here, there is the clear impulse for propagating one's own genes. Dawkins' theory was not so much wrong as limited in scope. that drive to propagate one's own genetic line is only part of a larger and much more intricate web of social evolution of a species.

 

"There are at least two kinds of games.
One could be called finite, the other infinite.
A finite game is played for the purpose of winning,
an infinite game for the purpose of continuing play."
Finite and Infinite Games, James Carse

Comments

  • TalemireTalemire Member UncommonPosts: 839
    Speaking of this topic, you might want to check out the debate tonight between Ken Ham and Bill Nye!
    Isaiah 41:10
Sign In or Register to comment.