It sucks knowing that you and your ilk will lose the evolutionary battle to an inferior mutation
I often wonder about the randomness of nature. Evolution has countless examples of beneficial genetic mutations forever altering the course of a species. Maybe 1 in 1,000,000 mutations is actually beneficial to a species. Of that small number, even fewer have a chance to procreate. Think about how the history of our planet may have been altered numerous times if that one in a million genetic mutation hadn't died before reaching sexual maturity. There are those that say if that occurred, then maybe the mutation wasn't so great. But what about happenstance? What if that particular speciman was struck by a falling branch, or broke their leg through no fault of their own and were given away to the food chain.
Another thought I have along these lines is how do species endure genetic mutations that aren't beneficial? Let's say a species gets a mutation that exponentially increased virility, but also comes with the negative side effect of being colorblind and thus not able to readily identify food sources. Sure, many will die of starvation, but their greater numbers assure the short-term domination of their gentic strain. As all resources are scarce, what becomes of the non-genetically mutated members of the species? How do they compete? If they don't survive, how has this particular evolutionary turn a benefit to the species? I guess the answer is who says that a successful mutation has to be beneficial to our existance?
My thoughts on these matters has its origin about a decade and a half ago when I realized the ideological differences between conservatives and liberals. Fifteen years ago, I knew where this was headed. Fifteen years later, I feel, hear, nor see anything that would make me think anything differently. Our species is in for a very rough century. In seeing these ideological differences I identified what I used to call narrative based thinking versus thinking based on logic and reasoning. I realized the danger narrative based thinking introduces as it is a worldview that is incredibly easy to manipulate. So vast were the differences in these two worldviews that I surmised those many years ago that the way in which we think is a split in our genetic evolutionary tree. I don't know if this is literally the case, but there are many studies that show fundamental differences in how our brains work, and even in how our brains are structured . The worldview of conservatives are negatively biased versus liberals which are positively biased (https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/full/10.1098/rstb.2011.0268#aff-1). There is also data that suggests these biases are based on our processing of fear. MRI's show a larger amygdala in conservatives, which is responsible for emotional processing, and is especially reactive to fearful stimuli and the creation of anxiety (https://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(11)00289-2). It is also linked to heightened sensitivity. This is why conservatives are so driven to do anything to assuage their fears. I also think they become addicted to their fear. They need an enemy. A bogeyman. These are fertile grounds for fascism. And that's exactly where we're headed.
So how does my branch of the evolutionary tree prevail? I don't think it does. There is no greater motivator than fear. And those of us that are liberal are genetically predisposed to have far less of it than conservatives. So the question I pose is how does the succumbing to fear and the subjugation, bigotry and hatred it fosters benefit our species? Perhaps nature is indifferent to the outcome, which is too bad as her indifference will ultimately lead to her demise. At this point, maybe that's the best option for all of us. The knowledge of this is what is so profoundly sad.
Another thought I have along these lines is how do species endure genetic mutations that aren't beneficial? Let's say a species gets a mutation that exponentially increased virility, but also comes with the negative side effect of being colorblind and thus not able to readily identify food sources. Sure, many will die of starvation, but their greater numbers assure the short-term domination of their gentic strain. As all resources are scarce, what becomes of the non-genetically mutated members of the species? How do they compete? If they don't survive, how has this particular evolutionary turn a benefit to the species? I guess the answer is who says that a successful mutation has to be beneficial to our existance?
My thoughts on these matters has its origin about a decade and a half ago when I realized the ideological differences between conservatives and liberals. Fifteen years ago, I knew where this was headed. Fifteen years later, I feel, hear, nor see anything that would make me think anything differently. Our species is in for a very rough century. In seeing these ideological differences I identified what I used to call narrative based thinking versus thinking based on logic and reasoning. I realized the danger narrative based thinking introduces as it is a worldview that is incredibly easy to manipulate. So vast were the differences in these two worldviews that I surmised those many years ago that the way in which we think is a split in our genetic evolutionary tree. I don't know if this is literally the case, but there are many studies that show fundamental differences in how our brains work, and even in how our brains are structured . The worldview of conservatives are negatively biased versus liberals which are positively biased (https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/full/10.1098/rstb.2011.0268#aff-1). There is also data that suggests these biases are based on our processing of fear. MRI's show a larger amygdala in conservatives, which is responsible for emotional processing, and is especially reactive to fearful stimuli and the creation of anxiety (https://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(11)00289-2). It is also linked to heightened sensitivity. This is why conservatives are so driven to do anything to assuage their fears. I also think they become addicted to their fear. They need an enemy. A bogeyman. These are fertile grounds for fascism. And that's exactly where we're headed.
So how does my branch of the evolutionary tree prevail? I don't think it does. There is no greater motivator than fear. And those of us that are liberal are genetically predisposed to have far less of it than conservatives. So the question I pose is how does the succumbing to fear and the subjugation, bigotry and hatred it fosters benefit our species? Perhaps nature is indifferent to the outcome, which is too bad as her indifference will ultimately lead to her demise. At this point, maybe that's the best option for all of us. The knowledge of this is what is so profoundly sad.
Comments
Post a Comment