4 ms·
These kind of evolution arguments are really common but seem super shaky to me. Saying "if it was better, it would've happened already" assumes humans are perf
by zaptheimpaler 8y ago
These kind of evolution arguments are really common but seem super shaky to me.
Saying "if it was better, it would've happened already" assumes humans are perfectly evolved right now, and negates any possibility of future evolution. That argument would be just as valid a 5000 years ago as it is now but presumably humans have evolved since then. Genes mutate randomly, selection pressures change, things in our environment might affect the way genes mutate - its much more complex.
- asdkhadsj 8y agoYea, evolution is just a good enough result based on current stimuli. Even if the output is great and near perfect, the "perfect" is still based on the requirements of the environment.
- vokep 8y agoThis isn't about humans though, but life in general. Mostly everything sleeps, theres been a lot of time for something to evolve that would both be intelligent and not need sleep, and yet there isn't. 5000 years isn't remotely close enough for sleeplessness to evolve, more like a few million. Its not so much why do humans sleep, but why do apes? Why does anything?
- Terr_ 8y agoThat seems just a little bit of an absolutist straw-man, though. Exaggerating further for effect: Nobody's saying sleep is a universal constant imposed by fundamental timeless physical law. Whatever is going on must be important, and not easy to avoid without serious trade-offs.