Proof Darwin was wrong:

[Jackpine Radical]

I mean, are you really gonna argue that Bush, or the people who voted for him are examples of the survival of the fittest? And remember, they seem to be reproducing faster than we are.

[shaolinmonkey]

1. actually, survival of the fittest was coined by a

"social darwinist", not Darwin himself. I think Darwin would draw a parallel between Bush and say, the platapus.

Most look upon it and say "what the hell?" But there it is. It evolved somehow, but the "why" is elusive.

[JaneDoughnut]

6. Social Darwinists piss me off

And how do so many hold the natural selection point of view when it's convenient and then reject evolution?

[shaolinmonkey]

8. Isn't it just amazing that most people who don't want evolution

taught in school are, themselves, social darwinists? It boggles the mind. They don't even get it. It makes my head hurt.

[Jackpine Radical]

7. Thomas Huxley, wasn't it?

[DelawareValleyDem]

10. Herbert Spencer nt

[Jackpine Radical]

11. Of course.

[Goldmund]

2. The only valid definition of "fittest" that I can think of...

...is "one who can survive".

So, yes. "Fittest" doesn't necessarily mean "smartest" or "most sentient" or "most developed", and it certainly doesn't mean "least evil".

:)

[Jackpine Radical]

9. Technically speaking, I believe fitness is generally

operationalized as the number of viable offspring compared to the mean for the species.

[Selteri]

13. Fittest means more resiliant, look at the Rhino.

We democrats got a setback, but during the election I heard something from too many Republican's mouths.

About registering democratic and voting for the weakest person to hamstring the party.

Is it possible we have hamstrung ourselves by forgetting that while we are secure that preogressive viewpoints in the social and scientific view with fiscal conservatism still need to be accompanied with a backbone and charisma to truly excite people?

[sangh0]

16. Funny how the members of the more "rational" party

have to struggle with how evolutionary scientists define the word "fittest"

And most of them will gladly deride a conservative's ignorance.

[Goldmund]

18. What exactly does that mean?

[sangh0]

20. What it means

is that Democrats who make fun of the creationists are awfully sad when they don't even understand the basics of evolution, like what "fit" means.

The only valid definition of "fittest" that I can think of is "one who can survive".

Hint: That's not "fit"

[Goldmund]

21. Can your highness then define 'fit' for me rather than just hinting?

If it's not too much time to ask out of your busy day.

[sangh0]

24. "fitness", in evolutionary terms

refers to the ability to succesfully reproduce.

[Goldmund]

25. To what ends is the reproduction?

Just the enjoyment of sex, or... what?

[sangh0]

26. To reproduce

.

[Goldmund]

27. No. It is so the species can survive.

[sangh0]

29. No, it's so the genes survive

and seeing as how you don't know what the word "fit" means, you may not be the best person to lecture on this subject.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

30. Genes and species are roughly (note: roughly) the same thing

What's a species but a group of individuals that share the same genetic makeup, within a tiny margin of error?

Valiant attempt at nitpicking. You failed. Try again.

[Jackpine Radical]

33. An organism is just the genes' way of making more genes.

[Goldmund]

31. Oh, fuck off.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

28. Oh, poor conservatives. They are SOOOO persecuted by the mean libruls. nt

[Worst Username Ever]

3. It depends on the definition of "fit."

If the country is more livable for repugs, if it is more hospitable to those with republican "values" than it is for progressives, if they are more likely to reproduce and therefor hand down their genetic material, then yes, that would be Darwin in action. It is a little dicey because we are all the same species, but if one group is able to outlive/outproduce another, then yes, that is Darwinism.

I have a hard time believing that our group is going to let that happen, however.

[wryter2000]

4. Reproduction = adaptive fitness

He who gets more of his genes into the next generation is the most fit. It doesn't have anything to do with brains or talent.

[kevinhnc]

5. The best description I've heard as to the "why" of evolution...

"It doesn't have to make sense, it just has to persist." The phrase should be survival of the most persistent.

[rman]

12. we aren't dead yet

we'll have to wait and see who actually survives.

[ydya]

34. Thank you rman, for pointing out something frequently overlooked

in popular discussions on evolution. Time.
Carlin once correctly said (and I'm paraphrasing here) that the "save the world" movements were arrogant. The world has endured for a whole lot longer than humans have been around. Human history is a blip in evolutionary time. If we keep at this pace (divisiveness/war/environmental destruction etc), we will ruin it for ourselves. Many many species will easily survive. So if he baser instincts of humans prevail, they may eventually lead to our undoing as a species; they may at least end the species as we know it.
It appears to me that biological species that have survived hundreds of millions of years have had the ability to manipulate their surroundings to suit their NEEDS. We (humans) are unique in having the greatest ability to tailor our surroundings to what we WANT as well. And some wants (needless greed-based and selfishly destructive) are not necessarily good for humans from collective and long-term points of view.
Also, "surroundings" had a connotation of geographic immediacy through most of even our (human) history. Over the past century or so, we have developed the technological ability to affect the entire world. So our "surroundings" have expanded. Therefore, our (collective human) actions may end up being more damaging than hithertofore precedented in earth's history. But make no mistake, the cockroaches will still be here. As will many microbes. And plants. And reptiles. And humans too.
It certainly doesnt help that the intelligent generally reproduce at a far lesser clip than the uninformed. But such is life.
And time will tell which species will eventually survive; but I dont think that we will extinguish our species. Even if the bloodthirsty come to dominate the earth, it will take us back only a few thousand years. And amongst the bloodshedding and barbarism intelligent reasoning will emerge in force once more; only to last for a while before it is torn down by organized religion or some such well organized, well funded divisive force. And the cycle will continue, till maybe, just maybe, one bunch of generations will finally learn from our bloody history and learn not to repeat it.
Po-too-weet. And so it goes. (that last line, of course, borrowed from Vonnegut).

ON EIDT: Forgot to add that humans have suffered many horrible times through history. Sad as it is, nature has a way of culling its herd. So cut Darwin some slack.
There is an evolutionary undertone to old TJ's famous comment that the tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.

[fshrink]

14. Actually

they are the missing link!

[Atlant]

15. "Fitness", of course, simply means the ability to fit into...

"Fitness", of course, simply means the ability to fit into your biome.
Cockroaches are an excellent example of a good fit, as, apparently,
are Republicans.

Atlant

[soothsayer]

17. I prefer his Russian contemporary who said evolution is actually

an increase in symbiotic systems----successful things learn to work with other things an then they're all successful.

[Javaman]

19. Smart and fit aren't mutually exclusive...

As long as they keep pushing on the pull door, there will always be someone to help them.

[mmonk]

22. Not really,

they look human like certain insects look like leaves, twigs or bark.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

23. So they're up there with bacteria and cockroaches.

[alevensalor]

32. You can kick around the exact meaning

of fittest all day if you like, the point of the thing is they are reproducing faster than we are, and seem to be more powerful in a social sense.

I don't think they're smarter than we are, I think they're just better at beating the hell out of whatever gets in their way.

~A!