What's new
Troll Kingdom

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Evolutionary reason for love?

Does it explain why we can't marry Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity in one unifying theory and Jennie didn't even give us one nipple slip?

I THINK NOT
 
CaptainWacky said:
What was the evolutionary puprose of death, again?
Click to expand...
Death is meaningless, because the propogation of a species depends on its life.

There is no environment on Earth in which only immortal species survive.

Death kills off those who are... well, weaker in the environment they inhabit, compared to those that possess traits more useful. Imagine if a blade of grass was born which couldn't properly absorb sunlight. It would thrive in darkness, but would only impede the well-being of grass more suited towards living in the sun.

Death can be said to be a sort of garbage cleaner. It's not nice to hear, but it's the truth. It's a revolting notion, eugenics, people dying because of something they can't control. It's nature, and we humans seem to value life... because it is evolutionarily beneficial.

We care about others. We judge ourselves by how much we can help our brothers and sisters, and that's why we are a pack of wolves, and not a hive of ants, where a single drone is meaningless towards some greater good.

To sum it up, a species can survive death because it occurs on an individual scale. Only when it hits an entire species (And once again, uses their weaknesses against them) does it become a significant factor.

We simply aren't meant to be immortal. The weaker die while the strong live. Without this concept, we simply would not exist, because we slew the old apes who were not smart enough to fight us off, or outlast us in cold winter or devastating drought.
 
The evolutionary reason for death has to do with the replicating nature of our genes and simple priorities.


People are merely disposable hosts for the replicating information contained in our genes. As long as the genes survive in our offspring the survival of the individual is not very important.


Basically the priorities to replicate and keep the host alive forever are not compatible. As long as the host lives long enough to procreate there is no longer a need for it's continued survival. This may be why we peak in our late 20's and then start to decline from that point on. Primitive people therefore live to 20-30 years, and no longer. It's onyl the protective nature of todays society that allows us to live so long. Our genetic make-up is spending massive resources in making sure we survive long enough to replicate but after a while it becomes a waste of resources. Survival is given a greater evolutionary priority on the genetic level than on the human scale after the priority of age is passed. Gene's are immortal, we are not.

If we were immortal then resources would be have to spent constantly on the unlimited self-repair of cells which would impact heavily on time spent putting all our resources into reproduction. We can't spent maximum resources on both. Evolution has deemed reproduction miore important than single hosts living forever. IF you look at it on the bigger scale, death doesn't occur to the "system", unless the species are destroyed. It's probably easier to look at such a system in the powers of ten. We're just a part of the chain on a grander scale.
 
Each person has themselves, and the things they perceive, all building to a finite culmination of experience. Reproduction is a perk, true enough.
 
2-mom-hug.jpg
 
Ishcabittle said:
Each person has themselves, and the things they perceive, all building to a finite culmination of experience. Reproduction is a perk, true enough.
Click to expand...
Your forefathers considered it a sacred duty. If they considered it a perk, you, and all of us, would not exist without their struggles.
 
That's the long and short of it, nowadays. Living on an artificial environment, manufactured food supply, and overpopulation has changed many rules indeed.
 
But if we prooved God is real then we don't have to believe in him any more because he know he is fact.

BUT God needs belief otherwise he does not exist.

SO God is dead.

QED.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top