3 ms·

> Evolution is not sentient, and doesn't 'design' or 'plan' or 'program'. Literally true but the effect is "as though" it designs or plans. See eg "Why evoluti

> Evolution is not sentient, and doesn't 'design' or 'plan' or 'program'. Literally true but the effect is "as though" it designs or plans. See eg "Why evolution is true" or any evolution text book eg "Evolution" by Douglas Futuyma. As for war versus hunting, the levels of violence in hunter-gatherer societies were astronomical with death rates from violence typically in the 30-50% range. So yes 'war' though not usually on a very large scale. There were some exceptions. For example San people (formerly known as the Bushmen of the South African desert) had as weapons bows and arrows with slow-acting poisons. A full-on war would result in everyone getting killed (mutually assured destruction). So they tended to avoid doing that.

vacri 12y ago
The effect isn't 'as though' it designs or plans at all, any more than clouds 'plan' to rain on the plains. Evolution is better described as 'survival of the fittest' than 'programmed to -foo-'. Keeping it phrased correctly also helps keep specious Intelligent Design arguments at bay - by talking about 'design' or 'programming', you're implying a sentient cause. And you don't actually need to say things like 'programmed by evolution' anyway. It's better to say 'resulting from evolution' or similar. Makes the same point, but keeps it correctly phrased.
- ourmandave 12y ago
  'survival of the fittest' is also misleading because fittest doesn't mean how buff you are, but how successfully one fits into their current environment. Being ripped doesn't save you from the plague, but it might help later against the zombies.
- hnriot 12y ago
  no, please stop spreading such misleading information, it is not survival of the fittest at all. go read about evolution please. You're right, evolution is not sentient, we're passed that, it is useful to think of it in that light when looking backwards at the process (as we can only really do anyway), we've all read the Blind Watchmaker and don't need this obvious point made over and over when it's been explained why we are doing so.

vacri 12y ago

The effect isn't 'as though' it designs or plans at all, any more than clouds 'plan' to rain on the plains. Evolution is better described as 'survival of the fittest' than 'programmed to -foo-'. Keeping it phrased correctly also helps keep specious Intelligent Design arguments at bay - by talking about 'design' or 'programming', you're implying a sentient cause. And you don't actually need to say things like 'programmed by evolution' anyway. It's better to say 'resulting from evolution' or similar. Makes the same point, but keeps it correctly phrased.

ourmandave 12y ago
'survival of the fittest' is also misleading because fittest doesn't mean how buff you are, but how successfully one fits into their current environment. Being ripped doesn't save you from the plague, but it might help later against the zombies.
hnriot 12y ago
no, please stop spreading such misleading information, it is not survival of the fittest at all. go read about evolution please. You're right, evolution is not sentient, we're passed that, it is useful to think of it in that light when looking backwards at the process (as we can only really do anyway), we've all read the Blind Watchmaker and don't need this obvious point made over and over when it's been explained why we are doing so.