3 ms·

> Your explanation barely makes sense even on its own merits. Surely, if nature wanted us to have N children and then take care of them, it would have set a cut

> Your explanation barely makes sense even on its own merits. Surely, if nature wanted us to have N children and then take care of them, it would have set a cutoff on N To talk about what nature "wants" is probably not very helpful. I can't speak for the idea that menopause exists because it is useful for old women nurture their grandchildren, but tendencies like it exist simply because they are helpful enough in an evolutionary sense. I mean, why should we want to have sex without reproducing? If nature "wanted" us to have children, why not make that coincide exactly with our sex drive? It's because no one designs these things or thinks of logical solutions. Having a sex drive regardless of individually wanting to have children works to a genetically beneficial end either way. > Is it to their evolutionary advantage to care for the children they didn't have? Their evolutionary advantage? How can an individual gain an evolutionary advantage in itself? When I'm dead, I'm dead. Nothing can be an advantage or a disadvantage to me as an individual at that point. The process of evolution stretches across generations and concerns things that do sustain for several generations, like genes. Why would a spider want to mate if it almost always gets eaten immediately after doing so? How is it to their individual advantage to be eaten? Why would bees be born without reproductive capabilities? It's because these are genetically beneficial traits, not because the individuals themselves will gain from it.

StavrosK 10y ago
> I can't speak for the idea that menopause exists because it is useful for old women nurture their grandchildren Exactly. The most we can say is "it's generally useful so it tends to happen". However, evolutionary biologists tend to paint their explanations with a certainty that just isn't there, and can look at any old random thing and say "well, this is obviously because X!". "Evolution made spiders eat their mates because it makes sense that they would want to preserve energy". Yes, but it also makes sense that the mates would stick around to feed the offspring, otherwise all species would kill the males after mating. We aren't as sure about why things are the way they are as evobio would have us believe, and not to mention evobio explanations for human psychology, which are usually completely ludicrous. In general, the process for explaining things using evolutionary biology seems to be: * Look at behaviour. * Find one advantage, however small, of said behaviour, regardless of disadvantages. * Say "well obviously this behaviour evolved like this because of that advantage". * Publish.

StavrosK 10y ago

> I can't speak for the idea that menopause exists because it is useful for old women nurture their grandchildren Exactly. The most we can say is "it's generally useful so it tends to happen". However, evolutionary biologists tend to paint their explanations with a certainty that just isn't there, and can look at any old random thing and say "well, this is obviously because X!". "Evolution made spiders eat their mates because it makes sense that they would want to preserve energy". Yes, but it also makes sense that the mates would stick around to feed the offspring, otherwise all species would kill the males after mating. We aren't as sure about why things are the way they are as evobio would have us believe, and not to mention evobio explanations for human psychology, which are usually completely ludicrous. In general, the process for explaining things using evolutionary biology seems to be: * Look at behaviour. * Find one advantage, however small, of said behaviour, regardless of disadvantages. * Say "well obviously this behaviour evolved like this because of that advantage". * Publish.