3 ms·
It is important to remember when analyzing such things that evolution does not optimize the reproductive fitness of organisms, it optimizes the reproductive fit
by lisper 6y ago
It is important to remember when analyzing such things that evolution does not optimize the reproductive fitness of organisms, it optimizes the reproductive fitness of genes. Organisms are a side-effect, a result of the fact that cooperation often provides a competitive advantage [1]. But evolution neither knows nor cares about civilization. It just so happens that, at the moment here on earth, genes that build brains that build civilizations reproduce better than genes that don't. But that has not always been the case, and there is no guarantee that it will continue to be the case. It is entirely possible that this whole civilization thing is just a transient.
IMHO a prerequisite to the survival of civilization is the recognition that the interests of civilizations can be, and often are, at odds with the interests of genes, and so we are necessarily in active conflict with the genes that made us. The best example of this is birth control, which is an obvious existential threat to the reproductive fitness of our genes. So genes that build brains that have an instinctive revulsion to birth control will, all else being equal, reproduce better than genes that build brains that don't have this revulsion. In the absence of active intervention, the result will be overpopulation.
For a civilization to succeed long-term it has to recognize that it is necessarily in conflict with the genes that produced its individual members, because otherwise the genes will win.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Evolution_of_Cooperation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Evolution_of_Cooperation
- whatshisface 6y agoI'm not sure if birth control is the greatest example of our genes being the enemy. Birth control is popular because raising a child is horrifyingly net-negative in the 21st century (unlike most prior centuries, where it made you richer and secured your future), and also because birth is incredibly painful for humans specifically. Both of those are unpleasant facts, and many people would consider our civilization better if they changed.
- lisper 6y agoBirth control is not an example of genes being our enemy, it is an example of us being our genes' enemy. And "us" is not really the right way to characterize this because our genes are part of "us". It is more like "the part of us that sees value in technological civilization in its own right" vs "the part of us that sees value in being the biological creatures we call humans". The fact that these concepts don't have names is one indication of just how far off the radar this idea is.
- blueblisters 6y agoIsn't all of modern healthcare an example of civilization being in active conflict with evolution? If "weaker" genes are not eliminated as often, we have effectively ruled out natural selection of survivalist traits.
- lisper 6y agoIt's a little more complicated than that. "Strong" and "weak" is not the right way to characterize genes. There is only "better and worse at reproducing in a particular environment." At the moment, our genes are in an environment where health care is available, so there are genes that are able to reproduce in that environment which might not be so good in a different environment. Also, we are not entirely at odds with our genes. Obviously the relationship is symbiotic to a large extent, because we can't exist without our genes and vice versa. But our brains can want things that are bad for our genes, and vice versa.