3 ms·
Ok, I now see how you were using the word "evolution". For some reason the fact that you were addressing the "natural fallacy camp" made me think you were talki
by splawn 10y ago
Ok, I now see how you were using the word "evolution". For some reason the fact that you were addressing the "natural fallacy camp" made me think you were talking about human evolution and its role in our eating habits, my mistake.
As far as your disagreement goes... Perhaps "breeding" wasn't the 100% accurate thing to say, but natural selection is the process that decides what genes to pass to the next generation causing evolution... if you really disagree with that you are not disagreeing with me personally, you are disagreeing with over 200 yrs of science spanning many fields.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- dave_sullivan 10y ago> you are disagreeing with over 200 yrs of science spanning many fields. Oh, is that what I'm doing? And here I thought I was suggesting that evolution (in practice and in theory) is a more nuanced process than you're letting on.
- splawn 10y agoYes, actually that is what you are doing. Natural selection is that simple. I think you are confused by the fact that sometimes the goals of "health" and "passing on genes" overlap. However "passing on genes" (or what ever the analogous "building block" is if you are using a genetic algo for something) is the only underlying "purpose" of evolution. There really isn't any more nuance required.. but go ahead, Im all ears..er eyes. If you don't want to write an essay just post up a link. Im curious if there is actually something out there leading you this way or if you are just "saying stuff".