3 ms·
The assumption that "natural selection has been trying to maximize lifespan, because the longer an individual lives, the more opportunity it has to reproduce" h
by rst 5y ago
The assumption that "natural selection has been trying to maximize lifespan, because the longer an individual lives, the more opportunity it has to reproduce" has an easier refutation: it clearly doesn't apply to a species where half the population goes through menopause (and stops being able to produce offspring) well before death.
(There are plenty of other species whose reproductive cycles are inconsistent with this assumption -- most notably all those with members that only mate once.)
- rantwasp 5y agoi think the assumption is fine as long as the individual reaches sexual maturity. Ie: natural selection will favor individuals but past that age all bets are off
- ruined 5y agomenopause is aging. there is an equivalent process for testosterone called andropause, it's just less dramatic and not as culturally prominent. hormone replacement therapy and other treatments exist for both.
- pontifier 5y agoI'm not sure this is really a refutation. There's something interesting in the idea that evolution has decided the old need to leave to make room for the new to prosper. Evolution acts on populations, not just individuals. Helping closely related individuals in the next generation survive is advantageous, and if that help is by being removed, then it could be programmed. Even frailty and decreased brain function might be programmed if it means that other individuals take over related tasks to gain experience.
- rst 5y agoSo we agree that natural selection is not necessarily trying to increase lifespans, for the reason given or any other?