7 ms·

The story anthropomorphizes death as a dragon (dracomorphizes?). I'm pointing out that it is doing so to an essential mechanism of biological evolution. That gi

The story anthropomorphizes death as a dragon (dracomorphizes?). I'm pointing out that it is doing so to an essential mechanism of biological evolution. That gives evolution a moral valence, per the story. In general, it should be clear that to cut a species off from a primary source of biological evolution would not usually be beneficial to that species' survival prospects. Maybe that is no longer true of Homo sapiens, but I doubt it.

blkhawk 4y ago
We are already cut of from general evolution as long as we have a society that relies mostly on factors externally to genetics. Those factors are so much more rapid and impactful than the slow evolution by procreation and death statistical processes that it makes little sense to even consider them.
kiba 4y ago
Destroying death doesn't cut off evolution, since humans are able to reproduce, which is our primary source of variation. Moreover, the story is about aging, not death. Although the ultimate outcome of aging is death.
ben_w 4y ago
Genetic evolution is probably already no longer part of humanity's future, regardless of death. We have generic engineering, albeit limited. Direct genetic engineering will be driven by memetic evolution within a generation or two.
- kiba 4y ago
  As long humanity continued to have children, there will be evolution.
  - ben_w 4y ago
    Just not of the genetic variety, not when we can read and write DNA like a book (or even like decompiled assembly language).
    - kiba 4y ago
      Genetic variation occurs through normal human reproductive process.
      - ben_w 4y ago
        In a world where it can be read and written at will, natural mutations will be irrelevant even when they occur.
stale2002 4y ago
> an essential mechanism It's not essential though, is the point. We can do better than the sloppy process of evolution.

7 ms·

The story anthropomorphizes death as a dragon (dracomorphizes?). I'm pointing out that it is doing so to an essential mechanism of biological evolution. That gi

by hirundo 4y ago

blkhawk 4y ago
We are already cut of from general evolution as long as we have a society that relies mostly on factors externally to genetics. Those factors are so much more rapid and impactful than the slow evolution by procreation and death statistical processes that it makes little sense to even consider them.
kiba 4y ago
Destroying death doesn't cut off evolution, since humans are able to reproduce, which is our primary source of variation. Moreover, the story is about aging, not death. Although the ultimate outcome of aging is death.
ben_w 4y ago
Genetic evolution is probably already no longer part of humanity's future, regardless of death. We have generic engineering, albeit limited. Direct genetic engineering will be driven by memetic evolution within a generation or two.
- kiba 4y ago
  As long humanity continued to have children, there will be evolution.
  - ben_w 4y ago
    Just not of the genetic variety, not when we can read and write DNA like a book (or even like decompiled assembly language).
    - kiba 4y ago
      Genetic variation occurs through normal human reproductive process.
      - ben_w 4y ago
        In a world where it can be read and written at will, natural mutations will be irrelevant even when they occur.
stale2002 4y ago
> an essential mechanism It's not essential though, is the point. We can do better than the sloppy process of evolution.