Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
SeanyTheSailor

Questions about humanity.

Recommended Posts

These are just some questions I posted on a different topic but it got me thinking about these.

 

Note: in this Topic evolution is assumed to be true, so if this angers you.. sorry.

 

 

1. Animals seek the most fit to reproduce, but then why do people stay with their abusers and continue to have children with them? While I realize you might say fear, wouldn't some sort of primordial SURVIVAL instinct kick in? (you get hurt you get away)

 

2. Do you think its possible that humans can/are de-evolutionizing? In the modern world we are provided with everything, food, water, shelter, protection. So the "weaker" of us don't die off, some examples that I can think of: Hemophilia, asthma, juvenile onset diabetes. While this may seem like a harsh, heartless outlook I think it is true (obviously), and before you think I'm a "master race" bastard know that I have asthma and yes I have wondered if I would make the cut.

 

3.Do you think humans were meant to be monogamous? I like to think of these days as the "Satisfaction Age" in that, if you have a desire you get it. Case in point are affairs, and before you go off on a rant about how that is only these days, they happened in earlier times, they just weren't publicized. Also if you look at most if not all group/"pack" mammals they aren't monogamous. Also just because a species is polygamous doesn't mean the male abandons the females.

 

4. Do humans/carnivores have a natural need for violence/bloodshed?

Since life first began things have been fighting, its just the way it is, physical combat is easier, more efficient and faster than "negotiation". In our modern world which is peace oriented however we don't get this sort of "satisfaction" in a natural way, so we have invented substitutes (sports) but the bottom line is does this craving/ need exist?

 

5.I also don't think humans were meant to live in as large of numbers as we do(multi-million cities, tens of thousands)My explanation is below.

If you think about the size of a population (human) the smaller it is in general less crime, violence and all that. For instance in larger cities you see things like gangs form, smaller groups almost "tribes" who engage in general "animalistic" activity together such as "hunting" and "territorial competition" unfortunately this manifests as gang wars and "hits"(this relates back to #4). So this begs the question "why do we live in these numbers then?" My mother came up with a possible answer. Unlike animals in the wild who have natural inhibitors such as food in the area, and competition we don't. So we don't naturally break off and form our own groups.

 

All opinions and explanations are welcome, and please try to be tolerant of what other people suggest no matter how much it denies what you believe.

 

Also you don't have to answer all of these just please let me/us know which one you are referencing.


2pzzjb9.jpg

106px-National_Defense_Service_Medal_ribbon.svg.png106px-Navy_Rifle_Marksmanship_Ribbon.svg.png120px-USN_Expert_Pistol_Shot_Ribbon.png

God dammit Seany, STOP SHARING MY MIND

" I believe in something greater than myself. A better world. A world without sin. I'm not going to live there. There's no place for me there... I'm a monster.What I do is evil. I have no illusions about it, but it must be done."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Question 5:

There still are natural inhibitors. They're just planetwide now because that's our species' range.

Since agriculture was discovered/invented/whatevered, it became easier to stay in one spot. From there it makes sense that more people would gather in the most suitable areas.

 

4) It might be competition as occurs in nature. Resources are limited, and so the ones who can get to them are the ones who live on. From there it could develop into whoever is most capable of getting them by whatever means necessary, and if being ruthless in doing so is beneficial, that may be passed on.

 

I'm here thinking that we're still part of nature. We still, for the most part, follow its rules. The fittest still have a better shot than others. The chances were improved though.

 

Funny how it's because of all this higher order thinking that we do this though. Evolution is a tricky [bleep].

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Simple; humanity has evolved past the point of common animals. We don't share all their traits. Thus, we got our own custom traits. Basically, we're different end of story.


"The cry of the poor is not always just, but if you never hear it you'll never know what justice is."

siggy3s.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Animals seek the most fit to reproduce, but then why do people stay with their abusers and continue to have children with them? While I realize you might say fear, wouldn't some sort of primordial SURVIVAL instinct kick in? (you get hurt you get away)

I would assume out of fear of being hurt even more if the person finds you, or fear of holding yourself responsible if the person does something crazy because you left.

 

2. Do you think its possible that humans can/are de-evolutionizing? In the modern world we are provided with everything, food, water, shelter, protection. So the "weaker" of us don't die off, some examples that I can think of: Hemophilia, asthma, juvenile onset diabetes. While this may seem like a harsh, heartless outlook I think it is true (obviously), and before you think I'm a "master race" bastard know that I have asthma and yes I have wondered if I would make the cut.

I don't think devolving is the right word for it. I think that evolution as far as the elimination of unfavorable traits has been slowed very much, but we aren't regressing as a species. I think a better way to say this is that we are at almost a standstill from an evolutionary standpoint, save for some physical traits. For example, the average height has been changing over the years.

 

3.Do you think humans were meant to be monogamous? I like to think of these days as the "Satisfaction Age" in that, if you have a desire you get it. Case in point are affairs, and before you go off on a rant about how that is only these days, they happened in earlier times, they just weren't publicized. Also if you look at most if not all group/"pack" mammals they aren't monogamous.

No, humans were not meant to be monogamous. Other posters can explain this much better than I can, though.

 

4. Do humans/carnivores have a natural need for violence/bloodshed?

Depends on who you ask. I know a lot who would say yes, i have a social worker parent who says no. I really don't have a stance either way.


Amaranth_GTO.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Question 5:

There still are natural inhibitors. They're just planetwide now because that's our species' range.

Since agriculture was discovered/invented/whatevered, it became easier to stay in one spot. From there it makes sense that more people would gather in the most suitable areas.

 

4) It might be competition as occurs in nature. Resources are limited, and so the ones who can get to them are the ones who live on. From there it could develop into whoever is most capable of getting them by whatever means necessary, and if being ruthless in doing so is beneficial, that may be passed on.

5. I didn't think about that but still, is it enough of an inhibitor?

4.Interesting perspective

 

Also if i'm slower to respond im watching the State of the Union address to that's y


2pzzjb9.jpg

106px-National_Defense_Service_Medal_ribbon.svg.png106px-Navy_Rifle_Marksmanship_Ribbon.svg.png120px-USN_Expert_Pistol_Shot_Ribbon.png

God dammit Seany, STOP SHARING MY MIND

" I believe in something greater than myself. A better world. A world without sin. I'm not going to live there. There's no place for me there... I'm a monster.What I do is evil. I have no illusions about it, but it must be done."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the "weaker" of us don't die off, some examples that I can think of: Hemophilia, asthma, juvenile onset diabetes. While this may seem like a harsh, heartless outlook I think it is true (obviously), and before you think I'm a "master race" bastard know that I have asthma and yes I have wondered if I would make the cut.

And glasses. Yes, glasses. If anyone that needs glasses (probably myself included, eventually) were part of a pre-modern civilization-that is to say, before humans were civilized-they;d be dead pretty quick, not being able to see. And the best part is, the number of people that do need glasses nearly or do outnumber those who do. Pretty wild.


whalenuke.png

Command the Murderous Chalices! Drink ye harpooners! drink and swear, ye men that man the deathful whaleboat's bow- Death to Moby Dick!

BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD! SKULLS FOR THE SKULL THRONE!

angel2w.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Animals seek the most fit to reproduce, but then why do people stay with their abusers and continue to have children with them? While I realize you might say fear, wouldn't some sort of primordial SURVIVAL instinct kick in? (you get hurt you get away)

I would assume out of fear of being hurt even more if the person finds you, or fear of holding yourself responsible if the person does something crazy because you left.

 

2. Do you think its possible that humans can/are de-evolutionizing? In the modern world we are provided with everything, food, water, shelter, protection. So the "weaker" of us don't die off, some examples that I can think of: Hemophilia, asthma, juvenile onset diabetes. While this may seem like a harsh, heartless outlook I think it is true (obviously), and before you think I'm a "master race" bastard know that I have asthma and yes I have wondered if I would make the cut.

I don't think devolving is the right word for it. I think that evolution as far as the elimination of unfavorable traits has been slowed very much, but we aren't regressing as a species. I think a better way to say this is that we are at almost a standstill from an evolutionary standpoint, save for some physical traits. For example, the average height has been changing over the years.

 

3.Do you think humans were meant to be monogamous? I like to think of these days as the "Satisfaction Age" in that, if you have a desire you get it. Case in point are affairs, and before you go off on a rant about how that is only these days, they happened in earlier times, they just weren't publicized. Also if you look at most if not all group/"pack" mammals they aren't monogamous.

No, humans were not meant to be monogamous. Other posters can explain this much better than I can, though.

 

4. Do humans/carnivores have a natural need for violence/bloodshed?

Depends on who you ask. I know a lot who would say yes, i have a social worker parent who says no. I really don't have a stance either way.

1. ya but still what about fight or flight?

2.somone else brought up de-evolutionizing as being a bad word. Also the average height, i believe that is more due to nutrition and diet than genetics, could be wrong.

3.ok

4. Just to be clear I'm not sking if humans are inherently good or bad i'm asking if we have the DRIVE per say


2pzzjb9.jpg

106px-National_Defense_Service_Medal_ribbon.svg.png106px-Navy_Rifle_Marksmanship_Ribbon.svg.png120px-USN_Expert_Pistol_Shot_Ribbon.png

God dammit Seany, STOP SHARING MY MIND

" I believe in something greater than myself. A better world. A world without sin. I'm not going to live there. There's no place for me there... I'm a monster.What I do is evil. I have no illusions about it, but it must be done."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Sometimes its psychological. See Stockholm syndrome.

 

 

2. You don't sound "Master Race" at all. Survival of the fittest is the process by which the weaker creatures that cannot adapt die off. The ones with the stronger features survive, insuring that each generation only gets stronger. These days, we have, for the most part, everything provided for us. Food, water, and because of it, the weak ones, those born with severe defects, and genetic diseases, will not die off. Also, it has led to an increasingly sedentary lifestyle. People aren't as physically strong. In nature, these people wouldn't survive, and if there comes a day when all these things are not handed to us, we may be in trouble as a species.

 

3. It's fine to satisfy your pleasures, just as long as it doesn't infringe on the rights of someone else. For example, if you're married, and you cheat, that is not ok. You made a commitment to your wife. However, in a situation where everyone is alright with it, then there's no problem.

 

4. Very good question...

 

5. This one stumped me. I believe humans are meant to live in groups, but maybe not in such large numbers as we currently do. Though today, many of us need a lot of people. Doctors and all that, or many people would die. As was said in #2, I don't know whether that's a good thing or a bad thing.

 

 

Very good thread :thumbsup:


LOTRjokesigedition-1.png

Get back here so I can rub your butt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Stockholm Syndrome (Did a paper about it for psychology :thumbup: )

Edit: [bleep]ing ninja'd >.> Took away my only valid response <.<

 

2. We have the technology/money to keep people alive without hurting anyone else... I don't see how this is de-evolution

 

3. Dolphins have sex for fun. Would it be okay if we had holes in our heads and lived under water?

 

4. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the reason the animal kingdom fights to find a female to have babies with?

 

5. Humans are "social" creatures :/ We're supposed to like other people...?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Simple; humanity has evolved past the point of common animals. We don't share all their traits. Thus, we got our own custom traits. Basically, we're different end of story.

Explain what you mean by "we're different" I agree that our brain has allowed us to progress to amazing levels but are we really DIFFERENT?

 

And glasses. Yes, glasses. If anyone that needs glasses (probably myself included, eventually) were part of a pre-modern civilization-that is to say, before humans were civilized-they;d be dead pretty quick, not being able to see. And the best part is, the number of people that do need glasses nearly or do outnumber those who do. Pretty wild.

My mom brought this up also, I am supposed to wear glasses but i don't.


2pzzjb9.jpg

106px-National_Defense_Service_Medal_ribbon.svg.png106px-Navy_Rifle_Marksmanship_Ribbon.svg.png120px-USN_Expert_Pistol_Shot_Ribbon.png

God dammit Seany, STOP SHARING MY MIND

" I believe in something greater than myself. A better world. A world without sin. I'm not going to live there. There's no place for me there... I'm a monster.What I do is evil. I have no illusions about it, but it must be done."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Stockholm Syndrome (Did a paper about it for psychology :thumbup: )

Edit: [bleep]ing ninja'd >.>

 

2. We have the technology/money to keep people alive without hurting anyone else... I don't see how this is de-evolution

 

3. Dolphins have sex for fun. Would it be okay if we had holes in our heads and lived under water?

 

4. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the reason the animal kingdom fights to find a female to have babies with?

 

5. Humans are "social" creatures :/ We're supposed to like other people...?

 

1. I'll have to look into it thanks

 

2. Evolution is about making an animal most fit to live in it's environment and reproduce, so by keeping them alive they can pass on these "negative traits"

 

3. Relevance?

 

4. True, also territory, and resources.

 

5. I believe humans are social creatures but d you think we've "exceeded our socialness" lol like in the animal kingdom if say a pack gets too big not all members can be fed so they either split of die, this doesnt happen in humanity due to farming and domestication.

 

 

 

i'd like to respond to all of you but atm you're all responding quickly and bringing up good points so don't think I'm ignoring you.


2pzzjb9.jpg

106px-National_Defense_Service_Medal_ribbon.svg.png106px-Navy_Rifle_Marksmanship_Ribbon.svg.png120px-USN_Expert_Pistol_Shot_Ribbon.png

God dammit Seany, STOP SHARING MY MIND

" I believe in something greater than myself. A better world. A world without sin. I'm not going to live there. There's no place for me there... I'm a monster.What I do is evil. I have no illusions about it, but it must be done."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Sometimes its psychological. See Stockholm syndrome.

 

 

2. You don't sound "Master Race" at all. Survival of the fittest is the process by which the weaker creatures that cannot adapt die off. The ones with the stronger features survive, insuring that each generation only gets stronger. These days, we have, for the most part, everything provided for us. Food, water, and because of it, the weak ones, those born with severe defects, and genetic diseases, will not die off. Also, it has led to an increasingly sedentary lifestyle. People aren't as physically strong. In nature, these people wouldn't survive, and if there comes a day when all these things are not handed to us, we may be in trouble as a species.

 

3. It's fine to satisfy your pleasures, just as long as it doesn't infringe on the rights of someone else. For example, if you're married, and you cheat, that is not ok. You made a commitment to your wife. However, in a situation where everyone is alright with it, then there's no problem.

 

4. Very good question...

 

5. This one stumped me. I believe humans are meant to live in groups, but maybe not in such large numbers as we currently do. Though today, many of us need a lot of people. Doctors and all that, or many people would die. As was said in #2, I don't know whether that's a good thing or a bad thing.

 

 

Very good thread :thumbsup:

3. I'm wondering if it's more of a primordial drive to "spread you genes" to as many as possible rather than just guilty pleasure

 

I think the reest of your points i addressed by addressing other people's

 

And thanks for the compliment


2pzzjb9.jpg

106px-National_Defense_Service_Medal_ribbon.svg.png106px-Navy_Rifle_Marksmanship_Ribbon.svg.png120px-USN_Expert_Pistol_Shot_Ribbon.png

God dammit Seany, STOP SHARING MY MIND

" I believe in something greater than myself. A better world. A world without sin. I'm not going to live there. There's no place for me there... I'm a monster.What I do is evil. I have no illusions about it, but it must be done."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1. Animals seek the most fit to reproduce, but then why do people stay with their abusers and continue to have children with them? While I realize you might say fear, wouldn't some sort of primordial SURVIVAL instinct kick in? (you get hurt you get away)
Emotionally attached to that person, causing you to believe you understand these reasons.

 

2. Do you think its possible that humans can/are de-evolutionizing? In the modern world we are provided with everything, food, water, shelter, protection. So the "weaker" of us don't die off, some examples that I can think of: Hemophilia, asthma, juvenile onset diabetes. While this may seem like a harsh, heartless outlook I think it is true (obviously), and before you think I'm a "master race" bastard know that I have asthma and yes I have wondered if I would make the cut.

Yes and no. Some people with genetic disabilities who should be dieing out are kept alive through nature without improvement.They can then breed and continue passing on this trait that shouldn't be around. There is also the fact that we've evolved to improving some previously destructive traits, and can possibly be using them for the advantage. People change with the society, and in our current one it would be more of evolution and de-evolution.

3.Do you think humans were meant to be monogamous? I like to think of these days as the "Satisfaction Age" in that, if you have a desire you get it. Case in point are affairs, and before you go off on a rant about how that is only these days, they happened in earlier times, they just weren't publicized. Also if you look at most if not all group/"pack" mammals they aren't monogamous.

I'm not sure how they were "meant" to be, but I do know that it's best that now we have at least one person to be with.

 

4. Do humans/carnivores have a natural need for violence/bloodshed?

Since life first began things have been fighting, its just the way it is, physical combat is easier, more efficient and faster than "negotiation". In our modern world which is peace oriented however we don't get this sort of "satisfaction" in a natural way, so we have invented substitutes (sports) but the bottom line is does this craving/ need exist?

Yes, someone needs to be dominant, and the most effective ways use violence. We also need to gather food, because surviving on plants alone doesn't allow you to be completely healthy.

 

5.I also don't think humans were meant to live in as large of numbers as we do(multi-million cities, tens of thousands)My explanation is below.

If you think about the size of a population (human) the smaller it is in general less crime, violence and all that. For instance in larger cities you see things like gangs form, smaller groups almost "tribes" who engage in general "animalistic" activity together such as "hunting" and "territorial competition" unfortunately this manifests as gang wars and "hits"(this relates back to #4). So this begs the question "why do we live in these numbers then?" My mother came up with a possible answer. Unlike animals in the wild who have natural inhibitors such as food in the area, and competition we don't. So we don't naturally break off and form our own groups.

 

Again with the "meant" which I refuse to acknowledge in that way. Personally I believe that these huge populations both hinder and help us. In trying to care for huge populations, we've been able to create more effective means for survival, but at the same we abuse some of those means in a way that it hurts us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1. Animals seek the most fit to reproduce, but then why do people stay with their abusers and continue to have children with them? While I realize you might say fear, wouldn't some sort of primordial SURVIVAL instinct kick in? (you get hurt you get away)
Emotionally attached to that person, causing you to believe you understand these reasons.

 

2. Do you think its possible that humans can/are de-evolutionizing? In the modern world we are provided with everything, food, water, shelter, protection. So the "weaker" of us don't die off, some examples that I can think of: Hemophilia, asthma, juvenile onset diabetes. While this may seem like a harsh, heartless outlook I think it is true (obviously), and before you think I'm a "master race" bastard know that I have asthma and yes I have wondered if I would make the cut.

Yes and no. Some people with genetic disabilities who should be dieing out are kept alive through nature without improvement.They can then breed and continue passing on this trait that shouldn't be around. There is also the fact that we've evolved to improving some previously destructive traits, and can possibly be using them for the advantage. People change with the society, and in our current one it would be more of evolution and de-evolution.

3.Do you think humans were meant to be monogamous? I like to think of these days as the "Satisfaction Age" in that, if you have a desire you get it. Case in point are affairs, and before you go off on a rant about how that is only these days, they happened in earlier times, they just weren't publicized. Also if you look at most if not all group/"pack" mammals they aren't monogamous.

I'm not sure how they were "meant" to be, but I do know that it's best that now we have at least one person to be with.

 

4. Do humans/carnivores have a natural need for violence/bloodshed?

Since life first began things have been fighting, its just the way it is, physical combat is easier, more efficient and faster than "negotiation". In our modern world which is peace oriented however we don't get this sort of "satisfaction" in a natural way, so we have invented substitutes (sports) but the bottom line is does this craving/ need exist?

Yes, someone needs to be dominant, and the most effective ways use violence. We also need to gather food, because surviving on plants alone doesn't allow you to be completely healthy.

 

5.I also don't think humans were meant to live in as large of numbers as we do(multi-million cities, tens of thousands)My explanation is below.

If you think about the size of a population (human) the smaller it is in general less crime, violence and all that. For instance in larger cities you see things like gangs form, smaller groups almost "tribes" who engage in general "animalistic" activity together such as "hunting" and "territorial competition" unfortunately this manifests as gang wars and "hits"(this relates back to #4). So this begs the question "why do we live in these numbers then?" My mother came up with a possible answer. Unlike animals in the wild who have natural inhibitors such as food in the area, and competition we don't. So we don't naturally break off and form our own groups.

 

Again with the "meant" which I refuse to acknowledge in that way. Personally I believe that these huge populations both hinder and help us. In trying to care for huge populations, we've been able to create more effective means for survival, but at the same we abuse some of those means in a way that it hurts us.

 

1. Understand these reasons? explain please

2.Your wording kind of confused me but ok.

3.I don't think eveveryone should say "oh we were "meant" to be this why so f u significant other", but should we gradually move back to that?

4.i forget where i heard it but i think there is evidence that our brains really began to take off when we started eating meat.

5. i'm not saying we aren't supposed to have a large population just not... concentrated as it is.


2pzzjb9.jpg

106px-National_Defense_Service_Medal_ribbon.svg.png106px-Navy_Rifle_Marksmanship_Ribbon.svg.png120px-USN_Expert_Pistol_Shot_Ribbon.png

God dammit Seany, STOP SHARING MY MIND

" I believe in something greater than myself. A better world. A world without sin. I'm not going to live there. There's no place for me there... I'm a monster.What I do is evil. I have no illusions about it, but it must be done."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4.i forget where i heard it but i think there is evidence that our brains really began to take off when we started eating meat.

If I'm not wrong in early human history we ate meat that we could hunt. We ate more plants because they were easier to find. Civilization started to take off after we got access to agriculture, because we didn't have to spend our entire days hunting and gathering.

5. i'm not saying we aren't supposed to have a large population just not... concentrated as it is.

We're getting closer to 7 billion people, so it's probably only going to get more compact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4.i forget where i heard it but i think there is evidence that our brains really began to take off when we started eating meat.

If I'm not wrong in early human history we ate meat that we could hunt. We ate more plants because they were easier to find. Civilization started to take off after we got access to agriculture, because we didn't have to spend our entire days hunting and gathering.

5. i'm not saying we aren't supposed to have a large population just not... concentrated as it is.

We're getting closer to 7 billion people, so it's probably only going to get more compact.

4. Not civilization but our actual intelligence as a species. Yes civilization could only be because of farming.

5. yeah and given space that shouldn't matter. I'm saying are our groups not "splitting" when they should.


2pzzjb9.jpg

106px-National_Defense_Service_Medal_ribbon.svg.png106px-Navy_Rifle_Marksmanship_Ribbon.svg.png120px-USN_Expert_Pistol_Shot_Ribbon.png

God dammit Seany, STOP SHARING MY MIND

" I believe in something greater than myself. A better world. A world without sin. I'm not going to live there. There's no place for me there... I'm a monster.What I do is evil. I have no illusions about it, but it must be done."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These are just some questions I posted on a different topic but it got me thinking about these.

 

Note: in this Topic evolution is assumed to be true, so if this angers you.. sorry.

 

 

1. Animals seek the most fit to reproduce, but then why do people stay with their abusers and continue to have children with them? While I realize you might say fear, wouldn't some sort of primordial SURVIVAL instinct kick in? (you get hurt you get away)

 

2. Do you think its possible that humans can/are de-evolutionizing? In the modern world we are provided with everything, food, water, shelter, protection. So the "weaker" of us don't die off, some examples that I can think of: Hemophilia, asthma, juvenile onset diabetes. While this may seem like a harsh, heartless outlook I think it is true (obviously), and before you think I'm a "master race" bastard know that I have asthma and yes I have wondered if I would make the cut.

 

3.Do you think humans were meant to be monogamous? I like to think of these days as the "Satisfaction Age" in that, if you have a desire you get it. Case in point are affairs, and before you go off on a rant about how that is only these days, they happened in earlier times, they just weren't publicized. Also if you look at most if not all group/"pack" mammals they aren't monogamous.

 

4. Do humans/carnivores have a natural need for violence/bloodshed?

Since life first began things have been fighting, its just the way it is, physical combat is easier, more efficient and faster than "negotiation". In our modern world which is peace oriented however we don't get this sort of "satisfaction" in a natural way, so we have invented substitutes (sports) but the bottom line is does this craving/ need exist?

 

5.I also don't think humans were meant to live in as large of numbers as we do(multi-million cities, tens of thousands)My explanation is below.

If you think about the size of a population (human) the smaller it is in general less crime, violence and all that. For instance in larger cities you see things like gangs form, smaller groups almost "tribes" who engage in general "animalistic" activity together such as "hunting" and "territorial competition" unfortunately this manifests as gang wars and "hits"(this relates back to #4). So this begs the question "why do we live in these numbers then?" My mother came up with a possible answer. Unlike animals in the wild who have natural inhibitors such as food in the area, and competition we don't. So we don't naturally break off and form our own groups.

 

All opinions and explanations are welcome, and please try to be tolerant of what other people suggest no matter how much it denies what you believe.

 

Also you don't have to answer all of these just please let me/us know which one you are referencing.

 

Although I've given my response to some of them, I'll repeat them here.

 

1) I'll pass on this one seeing as I don't know much about psychology. I suspect there's more to it than mere fight or flight.

 

2) I remember writing a paper on this back in highschool. My basic argument was that evolution would virtually stop in the western world, but it would continue to some extent in the third world, unless there was a major influx of medicine and food. Basically, there is no selective pressure to change the population of the west. We all get the medicine we need and are cared for if we're disabled in any way, so there's still an opportunity to pass on negative traits to future generations. In third world countries, there is a selective advantage to being immune to various diseases and a disadvantage to having a genetic disease, so there is still an opportunity for further evolution in those populations. In the other thread I used the example of sickle cell anemia. In places where malaria is common, the sickle cell trait is as well, because the sickle-shaped red blood cells stop the life cycle of the malaria parasite. Because malaria is worse than sickle cell anemia, the sickle cell trait was selected for. This wouldn't be the case in countries with widely avaliable medicine.

 

3) Monogamy in humans is a social institution, not a biological one. It's in our best interests to spread our genes to as many mates as possible, hence why monogamy is rare in mammals. That's not to say that monogamy is a bad thing, though.

 

4) I don't think there's a need for it, I just think it's a natural outworking of tribalism. Historically, humans were organised into tribes which organised their resources within their in-group. Whenever one tribe met another and there were resources at stake, there was the potential for violence. I think racism, nationalism and other such -isms might be the remnants of this kind of tribalism.

 

5) I think your analysis is largely right. Huge populations of people aren't really natural. It's only through established agriculture and transportation that millions of us can all come together in the same place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can answer this by saying: our ideas of evolution are completely infantile and too clinging to religion, following these ridiculous ideas of "Survival of the fittest" and "Best suited for the environment". Those are part of the equation. But then comes a mother-[bleep]ing platypus that goes and feeds its egg-born children after killing an antelope or whatever.

 

Good enough answer for me.


catch it now so you can like it before it went so mainstream

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think other posters have answered the other questions sufficiently, so

 

3. Humans are meant for marriage in general, be it monogamous or polygamous. Random affairs would destroy the family unit and make it harder to raise children.

 

5. Cities are the basis of industrial civilization. The modern technology and high standard of living that developed countries enjoy are a result of high urbanization.

 

Also, even if you believe that humans are evolved from more primitive species (I don't) it doesn't mean that all human behavior is a direct result of natural influences and that sort of thing. Challenges that a hypothetical human ancestor might have faced in nature aren't necessarily relevant to us.


Ah, this reminds me about the noob on the Runescape forums who was upset with the quest "Cold War" because apparently his grandparents died in the war. :wall:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These are just some questions I posted on a different topic but it got me thinking about these.

 

Note: in this Topic evolution is assumed to be true, so if this angers you.. sorry.

 

 

1. Animals seek the most fit to reproduce, but then why do people stay with their abusers and continue to have children with them? While I realize you might say fear, wouldn't some sort of primordial SURVIVAL instinct kick in? (you get hurt you get away)

 

2. Do you think its possible that humans can/are de-evolutionizing? In the modern world we are provided with everything, food, water, shelter, protection. So the "weaker" of us don't die off, some examples that I can think of: Hemophilia, asthma, juvenile onset diabetes. While this may seem like a harsh, heartless outlook I think it is true (obviously), and before you think I'm a "master race" bastard know that I have asthma and yes I have wondered if I would make the cut.

 

3.Do you think humans were meant to be monogamous? I like to think of these days as the "Satisfaction Age" in that, if you have a desire you get it. Case in point are affairs, and before you go off on a rant about how that is only these days, they happened in earlier times, they just weren't publicized. Also if you look at most if not all group/"pack" mammals they aren't monogamous.

 

4. Do humans/carnivores have a natural need for violence/bloodshed?

Since life first began things have been fighting, its just the way it is, physical combat is easier, more efficient and faster than "negotiation". In our modern world which is peace oriented however we don't get this sort of "satisfaction" in a natural way, so we have invented substitutes (sports) but the bottom line is does this craving/ need exist?

 

5.I also don't think humans were meant to live in as large of numbers as we do(multi-million cities, tens of thousands)My explanation is below.

If you think about the size of a population (human) the smaller it is in general less crime, violence and all that. For instance in larger cities you see things like gangs form, smaller groups almost "tribes" who engage in general "animalistic" activity together such as "hunting" and "territorial competition" unfortunately this manifests as gang wars and "hits"(this relates back to #4). So this begs the question "why do we live in these numbers then?" My mother came up with a possible answer. Unlike animals in the wild who have natural inhibitors such as food in the area, and competition we don't. So we don't naturally break off and form our own groups.

 

All opinions and explanations are welcome, and please try to be tolerant of what other people suggest no matter how much it denies what you believe.

 

Also you don't have to answer all of these just please let me/us know which one you are referencing.

 

 

1. I beleive they stay with them because the abuse inspires a demoralization in self worth. Eventually the abused will feel like they can't make it in the utsied world, and that in some bizzare way they deserve they're crappy relationship.

 

2. Birth control and money/power are corrupting out gene pool. This in cludes modern medicine. The human race is de-evolving at an alarming rate. The weak are living, and breeding.

 

3. Naturally we weren't meant to be monogomous. But society affects us, and society dictates that we have to be. This custom was likely started in a fit of jealousy somewhere down the line. This also supports my theory of our detatchment from our intended nature, or de-evolution.

 

4. A need for violence? Not so much, I see it as a reflex inpulse to retaliate certain circumstances. It's not a want or desire. It's not even a need. It just is.

 

5. I agree. Small populations of sparse human life would be iedal for both humans and Earth.


Quote

 

Quote

Anyone who likes tacos is incapable of logic.

Anyone who likes logic is incapable of tacos.

 

PSA: SaqPrets is an Estonian Dude

Steam: NippleBeardTM

Origin: Brand_New_iPwn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can answer this by saying: our ideas of evolution are completely infantile and too clinging to religion, following these ridiculous ideas of "Survival of the fittest" and "Best suited for the environment". Those are part of the equation. But then comes a mother-[bleep]ing platypus that goes and feeds its egg-born children after killing an antelope or whatever.

 

Good enough answer for me.

You mean to tell me the platypus isn't the fittest? :cry:

 

On topic

Evolution doesn't even have to contradict Christian creationism. Look at what we started as, look where we are now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can answer this by saying: our ideas of evolution are completely infantile and too clinging to religion, following these ridiculous ideas of "Survival of the fittest" and "Best suited for the environment". Those are part of the equation. But then comes a mother-[bleep]ing platypus that goes and feeds its egg-born children after killing an antelope or whatever.

 

Good enough answer for me.

 

You have a real problem with evolution, don't you?

 

Adaptation to the environment and "survival of the fittest" (although it's a misleading term) are perfectly reasonable and logical. How on earth you get "infantile" and "clinging to religion" out of this is beyond me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think other posters have answered the other questions sufficiently, so

 

3. Humans are meant for marriage in general, be it monogamous or polygamous. Random affairs would destroy the family unit and make it harder to raise children.

 

5. Cities are the basis of industrial civilization. The modern technology and high standard of living that developed countries enjoy are a result of high urbanization.

 

Also, even if you believe that humans are evolved from more primitive species (I don't) it doesn't mean that all human behavior is a direct result of natural influences and that sort of thing. Challenges that a hypothetical human ancestor might have faced in nature aren't necessarily relevant to us.

3.What do you mean by marriage? staying with their mates?

5. Ok so they are the basis of it,but where theymeant to be/do they have to be so vast?


2pzzjb9.jpg

106px-National_Defense_Service_Medal_ribbon.svg.png106px-Navy_Rifle_Marksmanship_Ribbon.svg.png120px-USN_Expert_Pistol_Shot_Ribbon.png

God dammit Seany, STOP SHARING MY MIND

" I believe in something greater than myself. A better world. A world without sin. I'm not going to live there. There's no place for me there... I'm a monster.What I do is evil. I have no illusions about it, but it must be done."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can answer this by saying: our ideas of evolution are completely infantile and too clinging to religion, following these ridiculous ideas of "Survival of the fittest" and "Best suited for the environment". Those are part of the equation. But then comes a mother-[bleep]ing platypus that goes and feeds its egg-born children after killing an antelope or whatever.

 

Good enough answer for me.

The problem with your statement is that platapi?(platapuses?) don't eat antelope. They aren't BEST SUITED, heck even suited to do so. where as the crocodile has developed a camoflage like back, a very powerful jaw, and the proper teeth for eating/capturing antelope and other assorted wildlife.


2pzzjb9.jpg

106px-National_Defense_Service_Medal_ribbon.svg.png106px-Navy_Rifle_Marksmanship_Ribbon.svg.png120px-USN_Expert_Pistol_Shot_Ribbon.png

God dammit Seany, STOP SHARING MY MIND

" I believe in something greater than myself. A better world. A world without sin. I'm not going to live there. There's no place for me there... I'm a monster.What I do is evil. I have no illusions about it, but it must be done."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Understand these reasons? explain please

2.Your wording kind of confused me but ok.

3.I don't think eveveryone should say "oh we were "meant" to be this why so f u significant other", but should we gradually move back to that?

4.i forget where i heard it but i think there is evidence that our brains really began to take off when we started eating meat.

5. i'm not saying we aren't supposed to have a large population just not... concentrated as it is.

 

1. I meant reasons as in say "he hit me because it's my fault / he's having a hard time". Basically believing they understand a person so they may feel bad for him, or have other emotional responses that prevent them from leaving.

 

2. I meant that as in: Person A has a high chance to pass on a deadly late-life disease, but survives due to medicine. That person then has children who also have that disease, and they have the same thing that the father had happen, happen to them They have more children, and the cycle continues. Because we're advancing, they're surviving, but they shouldn't be surviving to cause this to happen to other people. We're evolving in a way that benefits and destroys others.

 

3. I accidentally got number three wrong, by monogamous I thought you meant something else. My opinion on monogamous type things is kinda meh, because personally I don't see it as making that much of a difference. If anything, it should be more of a do what you want thing.

 

4. I don't pay much attention to that, but when it comes to violence and such, I believe it is needed. I think people need to rise above others, and quite often force is necessary to do so. I actually believe it's more of nature that has a rise above each other, which in turn leads us to violence being part of nature.

 

5. My answer works for both a large total population and tightly condensed one. I can't really decide on which I see more positives or negatives to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.