I mean why? Why is not survival of the fittest? It’s simply a matter of definition of “fit”. 🤷♂️ If the fittest means you have rich ancestors, then so be it, in some context. If it means being able to wrestle someone to the ground, that’s fine in another context. We live in many different contexts, as humans. It’s not black and white…
Because we have all given into the social construct of “we won’t kill you and take all your shit”. That was the deal. We stopped playing by the “if you piss me off me and my community with bash in your knee caps”. Most the fuckers who chant “survival of the fittest” don’t understand what that really means. It means that _anything _ is fair game.
It turns out working together is a highly successful strategy. You can stretch the definition of “fit” to say that working together improves fitness, but if so, it still becomes much harder to justify Social Darwinism.
Whatever makes your genes more likely to spread goes into the definition of “fit” in this context.
Evolution doesn’t care how you managed to spread your genes. It only cares if you did it or not.
If you have great social skills, which ends up in you working together, which ends up in you being better than if you didn’t work together, which ends up in you spreading your genes, that counts towards your fitness.
I mean why? Why is not survival of the fittest? It’s simply a matter of definition of “fit”. 🤷♂️ If the fittest means you have rich ancestors, then so be it, in some context. If it means being able to wrestle someone to the ground, that’s fine in another context. We live in many different contexts, as humans. It’s not black and white…
Because we have all given into the social construct of “we won’t kill you and take all your shit”. That was the deal. We stopped playing by the “if you piss me off me and my community with bash in your knee caps”. Most the fuckers who chant “survival of the fittest” don’t understand what that really means. It means that _anything _ is fair game.
Evolution doesn’t really care about social constructs though. It will select on one thing and one thing only – offspring.
It turns out working together is a highly successful strategy. You can stretch the definition of “fit” to say that working together improves fitness, but if so, it still becomes much harder to justify Social Darwinism.
Whatever makes your genes more likely to spread goes into the definition of “fit” in this context.
Evolution doesn’t care how you managed to spread your genes. It only cares if you did it or not.
If you have great social skills, which ends up in you working together, which ends up in you being better than if you didn’t work together, which ends up in you spreading your genes, that counts towards your fitness.
That’s pretty much what I was saying, but I got down-voted. 😅