Quote:
Originally posted by rez,
you misread what I said about evolution.
I actually stated that all humans have evolved their brains to a point where everybody has the potential. Although all humans have the potential to succeed in life, by the luck of genes they do not have the correct environment.
Your example with the child in a third world culture does have the potential BUT what is the difference between him and a American child?
Evolution does have to do with the physical self....I agree. The brain is an organ in your body that has potential to grow....
WE now use our brain to manipulate the environment around us. We hunted, then farmed, industrialized, now whats next?
Sorry man we still have our biological instincts in all of us. in America we do not help the less fortunate just like our ancestors did not help a retarded baby, they would just leave it there to die. We still do that! but because of the environment we do it in different ways! The strong must survive and in todays world there is only one way to decipher who is strong - money.
Cave man thinking is not "unintelligent" it is survival of the fittest. Everybody goes up, not across, or down.....This is why communism does not work. Everybody wants to pound their chests in pride and greed.
Women are still discriminated and have been since the dawn of man.....why? Races are always killed off, why?
We still create huge tall buildings. Women love big dick........
Now you might say that some cultures are actually backwards......smaller is better, women are equal, all races are good.........but why is America the worlds superpower........why isnt that other culture?
The KKK do share these ideas, but did I start a organization? The KKK went about it wrong, they did not adapt to their environment.
Like I said, Those who do not conform to America will be killed off. Does this have any relation to how evolution worked?
When ice covered the earth the people who figured out a way to make shelter and developed clothes survived......those who did not "conform" to these ideas died off indirectly. Natural selection and survival of the fittest......I am sorry but this is the harsh reality.
They say all super power nations fall at somepoint. This is true and even existed in primative man. for example........The neandthral could of been the best species, however do to their environment and the way they handled it they fell apart. This helps people learn from mistakes and develop better ideas giving birth to Cromagnaman.
America will fall but only because it couldnt handle the challeges of the environment. Giving brith to a new nation that will be even better then America was. |
I think that the brian is not growing physhically, what you are talking about is that knowledge is growing and the more knowledge you have obtainable in a given culture the better those people can learn it. This growth in knowledge is mainly due to the fact we can write stuff down and pass it on from generation to generation, plus we can add too it each time something new is discovered or found out about. In our more advanced cultures we have so much information abtainable via books and on the internet that we are lucky enough to even scratch the surface of the mountain of data. Why humans have that novelity called a large head size (compared with the monkey or other types of animals) is somewhat unexplained, and we do not have the missing links to prove that the head size grew bigger and bigger over years of evolution, chances are it happened quickly and independantly of normal evolutionary causes. My unauthorized speculation is that the skull could have grown larger (to protect the brain) because cave men kept hitting each other on the head with clubs. (And) alien genetic tampering cannot be ruled out.
However the idea that survivial of the strongest, as enacted during mating rituals, is the cause of most evolution is questionable. Most evolution is caused by stress in the environment. Be that a real problem (such as weather condidtions) or imaginary problems, the effects would be the same. But most evolution takes place within the spcies and would not cause a new spcies to manifest. Example, if a horse learns to run from the mountain lion it's legs would grow stronger and longer, so a tiny house could become a larger horse, and visa versa. So evolution is largely the same as lifting weights or dieting.
Now within the concept of techology evolving, that is a different story, in the arms race we started to invent bigger and stronger weapons, due to wars or agressive missions to expand a kingdom. The kingdom was evolving bigger but the people did not really evolve to being better then those they were attacking on a physical level. A caveman with a nuclear bomb is still a caveman. In fact if we evolve external technology, such as a better gun, that would eleminate the need to evolve better claws, fangs, or other physical weapons as extended useage relative to our body, and/or relative to the stress of fear, we might invent technology to escape instead of growing wings, faster legs, or the ability to alter our skin colors to match and blend in with the background environment. Technological evolution is not real evolution by natual selection.
If we suddenly lost all our technology to survive and were forced to deal with nature in a naked manner we would be ill-equiped to do so. Where as the native tribesman deep in the Amazon would have no problem.
RE: Reality TV show.
You stated that woman were always discriminated agenst from the dawn of creation (er, dawn if time), that is just false (see my post in the religion section) and in old days they were pretty much as physically strong as the men, but with better endurance for pain, and a longer life time.
If women like big dicks and that was a reason for evoultion then African men are way ahead of the Westerner in that department, that is why they need to buy long cadilacs to drive around in. Where as women in a more techological envornment got those plug in electronic gadgets and no longer need men for pleasure.
So I do not see how you can bring that into the debate? Other then just to sound shocking or to gross out readers. I certainaly hope Howard Stern is not an example of our most evolved human spicimen!
Your theory about the Ice Age is also questionable, because countless animals also survived those times and they did not learn how to make clothing or how to build camp fires or shelters (well, some animals did know how to build shelters - but animals who survived the Ice Age did not gain much improvement over those that did not survive). No one race of mice became better off then another spieces of mice. And humans that lived in areas effected by the ice age did not evolve fur for protection or the bear's skills at hibernation, nor did they evolve bigger flat feet for walking on the snow. I just do not see how the Ice Age made much difference. And so you would have to demonstrate how a mouse living in the far north is much better off evolutionary wise then a mouse that is living in the warmer zones to prove that point.
Now we come down to the test, which idea being presented here has the best chance to survive the peer pressures of time? May the strongest presentaton win.
Technosoul.