Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What, you've never heard of social evolution? As "good" is a social behavior and function, it has nothing to do with physical evolution. Wow, duh.
If animals (and humans are just one type of animal according to evolutionists) can , by their actions (or interactions with each other), stop physical (i.e. biological) evolution from having it's postulated effect, then biological evolution must be false, yes?
Biological evolution states that the individual self preservation and protection causes the strong to survive and the weak to be eliminated.
But your idea of 'social evolution' would cause the individual to work to preserve and protect something other than himself.
If you believe in biological evolution, aren't ALL of an animals behaviors the result of this process? If an animal (including man) is just a reactive biological machine, he must of necessity do what biology drives him to do.
If animals (and humans are just one type of animal according to evolutionists) can , by their actions (or interactions with each other), stop physical (i.e. biological) evolution from having it's postulated effect, then biological evolution must be false, yes?
Biological evolution states that the individual self preservation and protection causes the strong to survive and the weak to be eliminated.
But your idea of 'social evolution' would cause the individual to work to preserve and protect something other than himself.
If you believe in biological evolution, aren't ALL of an animals behaviors the result of this process? If an animal (including man) is just a reactive biological machine, he must of necessity do what biology drives him to do.
But yet you're saying that he doesn't.
You are massively mixing up terms and theories. First, social evolution isn't "my" idea. I also have no idea how got you to your last statement. Making an awful lot of assumptions I suppose.
Social evolution (aka socialcultural evolution, cultural evolution) simply describes how cultures and societies develop over time. You are also confusing these terms with "Social Darwinism" which is an entirely different theory.
Biological evolution is simply the change in the genetic material of a population of organisms from one generation to the next. It does not state that "individual self preservation and protection causes the strong to survive and the weak to be eliminated" as you stated.
"Survival of the fittest" is a phrase coined by Herbert Spencer. He drew parallels to his ideas on free-market economics with Darwin's term "natural selection". Darwin later used this same term as a synonym for natural selection in the 5th edition of On the Origin of Species. Darwin also used this as a metaphor, not as a scientific description.
Natural Selection does not mean "only the fittest organisms will prevail". People have confused this term and think it means that only those who are physically fit (meaning biggest, fastest or strongest) will survive. When Darwin used this phrase, he meant "better adapted for immediate, local environment", not the common modern meaning of "in the best physical shape." "Fitness" describes reproductive success, not whether or not a member of a species or group can outkill another. Natural selection is the process by which heritable traits that make it more likely for an organism to survive and successfully reproduce become more common in a population over successive generations.
Unfortunately, those who are most opposed to evolution (and even some who vehemently support it) do not really understand what Darwin was saying. Confusion over all these terms in modern popular culture has led to all these "does not follow" arguments, such as you presented in your post.
Those creatures who can adapt, who can best "fit" into their environment will live to reproduce, thereby passing on those traits that allowed them to "fit" in the first place. Get it?
Quote:
so, this, naturally would explain why people are not so nice.
It also would explain why people sometimes are so "nice".
Quote:
But if we came about as the "big bang" theorist say...then where did good come from?
You are conflating cosmology with evolutionary biology. As for the good, it came about as someone else said, group survival.
If humans (animals) evolved biologically, then everything they do is a result of that process of biological evolution. How could it be otherwise?
If they are working to preserve the group, then that behavior (just like any other behavior) is also a result of biological evolution as well.
What is funny is how often evolutionists want to run from the implications of their theory.
Well, I guess they really have to when you think about it.
Not running from anything. You just don't understand what Darwin actually said and that his theories did not speak of sociocultural evolution. Two different things. Once again, you create a false dilema. Let me break it down so even you can understand (though I'm doubtful as creationists think they know what evolution is despite what Darwin actually wrote and will not be dissuaded):
Natural selection = reproductive success
Sociocultural evolution = how societies and cultures develop over time
'Evolution is the cause of behavior that enhances individual survival....except when it's not.'
If you want to "survive natural selection", the important thing is that your genes survive.
This does means protecting yourself, up to a point. If you're dead, you can't reproduce, and can't do any of the other things below. (It also means being attractive to the other gender. Enough said.)
It means protecting your children, because they carry your genetic information. It's also important, though slightly less so, to protect your close familly. Their genetic information is fairly similar to your own.
But many species, including our own, go one step further and protect the whole tribe/group/pack. After all, in a pack, all members are more or less related. Besides, you have more chances to survive if you're surrounded by friendly pack members than if you're alone and in a cutthroat competition.
Allow me to add that your understanding of the theory of evolution is extremely poor, and that your sarcasm isn't doing much for other people's willingness to educate you. Stop being so antagonistic, and you'll learn better.
[SIZE=4]ev⋅o⋅lu⋅tion⋅ist[/SIZE] /ˌɛvəˈluʃənɪst or, especially Brit., ˌivə-/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [ev-uh-loo-shuh-nist or, especially Brit., ee-vuh-] Show IPA
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
əˈlu
