3 ms·

Thanks for mis-quoting me. This is the actual quote: > genetically gifted individuals having children together ... which is already happening and has been hap

by maratd 12y ago

Thanks for mis-quoting me. This is the actual quote: > genetically gifted individuals having children together ... which is already happening and has been happening for eons ... I mean, that's what evolution is. That is exactly what evolution is. The fit only mate with other fit individuals, accelerating the spread of traits which make them fit. With regard to my other statement: > The smart get smarter, the fast get faster, the strong get stronger, and the inferior disappear from the gene pool. The burden is on you to prove that intelligence, speed, and strength aren't being heavily selected upon in the human population. I made it as an off-hand comment, but I think it's pretty spot on regardless.

andyjohnson0 12y ago
I didn't mis-quote you. I quoted verbatim two linked and adjacent sentences from your comment. What you claim to be the "actual quote" was the second sentence (which I quoted) and the one that followed it (which I didn't). I didn't misrepresent what you wrote. I'll say it again: "...genetically gifted individuals having children together" and "The fit only mate with other fit individuals" is not what evolution is. Forms of life (including humans) have sometimes evolved strategies that try to allow them to select mates based on fitness, but the emergence of these strategies also allows those that use bluff and deception to gain an advantage by deceiving fitter mates into mating with them. "Fitness" here isn't some linear value, its multi-dimensional. Also, the very idea of individuals being "genetically gifted" is fairly meaningless. In a sense, every living human is genetically gifted because we possess genes that allowed every one of our ancestors over the last 2.4 million years to survive long enough to successfully reproduce. Most of the ones that tried didn't manage that. Survival of genes (not individuals) is what counts. Evolution doesn't have a purpose and it doesn't result in progress ("accelerating the spread of traits which make them fit", as you put it). I just tried to point that out.

by maratd 12y ago

andyjohnson0 12y ago

I didn't mis-quote you. I quoted verbatim two linked and adjacent sentences from your comment. What you claim to be the "actual quote" was the second sentence (which I quoted) and the one that followed it (which I didn't). I didn't misrepresent what you wrote. I'll say it again: "...genetically gifted individuals having children together" and "The fit only mate with other fit individuals" is not what evolution is. Forms of life (including humans) have sometimes evolved strategies that try to allow them to select mates based on fitness, but the emergence of these strategies also allows those that use bluff and deception to gain an advantage by deceiving fitter mates into mating with them. "Fitness" here isn't some linear value, its multi-dimensional. Also, the very idea of individuals being "genetically gifted" is fairly meaningless. In a sense, every living human is genetically gifted because we possess genes that allowed every one of our ancestors over the last 2.4 million years to survive long enough to successfully reproduce. Most of the ones that tried didn't manage that. Survival of genes (not individuals) is what counts. Evolution doesn't have a purpose and it doesn't result in progress ("accelerating the spread of traits which make them fit", as you put it). I just tried to point that out.