Subject:
|
Re: Future of Humanity (was: lotsa stuff)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 24 Oct 2001 03:52:09 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
786 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Ross Crawford writes:
>
> > Is there a "wrong way"?
>
> Optimization for local conditions can be suboptimal for global.
>
> I would hold that humanity's chief survival weapon is cleverness. Anything
> that selects against cleverness/intelligence/drive (the cited example, for
> instance) is bad for humanity's long term survival potential.
>
> Citing another bumper sticker (a personal fave...): "Be worried. Somewhere,
> right now, stupid people are breeding"
However, many species manage to survive (& flourish) without cleverness, simply
be breeding a lot. My point to Scott was I don't think right & wrong have any
relevance to evolution - local populations may evolve in ways which are
advantageous or not to the whole of humanity, but in the end, humanity will
continue to evolve, and cleverness will have little if anything to do with it.
Unless we blow ourselves up.
ROSCO
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Future of Humanity (was: lotsa stuff)
|
| (...) Optimization for local conditions can be suboptimal for global. I would hold that humanity's chief survival weapon is cleverness. Anything that selects against cleverness/intelligence/drive (the cited example, for instance) is bad for (...) (23 years ago, 24-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
133 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
