Natural selection

[hurts2b]

I feel like my suicide will be "natural selection" in a way since I am unfit for human society and life in general. But many would say natural selection doesn't apply to humanity.

Thoughts?

 

[Lov3]

99.9% of all species that have ever existed are extinct and we will all die, even the universe will die, so I wouldn't be thinking about natural selection.

Passing genes on? But our descendants will die too, and we wouldn't be alive to see it either.

So worry more about your well-being than about society, because society only drains us and then abandons us.

 

[Liwujin]

I think natural selection is still going on but instead it is society itself perfoming it. Technology, specially healthcare, has been keeping people alive that definitely wouldn't have made it in a more "natural" world—not saying you are one of them of course, I don't know.

 

[Forever Sleep]

It's an interesting concept. I find it intriguing to follow the train of thought through.

I've read before the irony that- people most concerned about the environment may opt not to have children. But then- that may mean that fewer children are therefore born and raised by people who care about the planet- so more may be likely to bring about human extinction and many other species with us. That said, I'm not convinced that a few environmentalists can or will save us now- regardless.

But- I've had the same thought as you. I don't think my genes do well in this world. I'm glad I haven't passed them on- because I think any child of mine would also suffer here.

Perhaps that is survival of the fittest at work- weeding out the weaklings. That said- I'm glad I don't have the traits of people who do well in this world. I think many of our leaders have narcissistic/ sociopathic/ psychopathic traits. Who wants to live in a world populated and run by them? I suppose they do! Which is fine by me- leave them be to destroy one another.

I also agree that- natural selection doesn't really apply to the human world. If a child is born with crippling disability- physical or mental- it often has money thrown at it to try to compensate, depending on how wealthy its parents were and where it lives.

Plenty of genetic vulnerabilities are passed on because we find the idea of eugenics fascist. And because people seem to think they have the right to reproduce- no matter what. I wonder how many even think that much about the genes they are passing on.

Like you say though- I suppose 'natural' selection has been replaced by other forms of selection.

 

[Hvergelmir]

...many would say natural selection doesn't apply to humanity.

Thoughts?

Of course it does. The only confusion is in the definition of "natural".
Different environments presents different selection pressures. Modern society makes your Facebook posts more important than your ability to fend off predators, but there's still selection. Some procreates more than others. Some survive better than others.

Likewise, an ant colony presents very different selection pressures, compared to the less ordered environment of more solitary insects. We can choose to call human cities and their selection pressures unnatural, but it's still fundamentally the same thing, about which genes spread more.

I feel like my suicide will be "natural selection"

Natural selection is the big pattern. Genetic lines that die more than they reproduce, go extinct.
It doesn't apply to any one individual.

You can have amazing genes, and still die young, or without children.

 

[Sphinxi]

Person who reads the Genealogy of Morals, sees that they are the untermensch, and commits suicide. Lol

 

[LaetumCat]

I think it definitely applies to society, especially since the current society is very capitalistic.
Basically, those, who are "weak" (either by being born with illnesses, or some accident happened, really in any way), don't contribute to the society, therefore, the society dislikes them, thinks of them as a pest, etc. If you're not "useful" to the society in one way or another, most people don't care about you - just think of addicts living on the streets. Sure, they may have been important when they weren't addicts and contributed to the society, but now? Nobody cares, and most people are disgusted by them, solely because they cannot take care of themselves in a way that wouldn't be seen as animalistic, basically, homeless people don't hold up to their standards, and so they're "naturally" left behind. It's sad really.

 

[13eyond 13irthday]

Depends. Did you have children? Did you support close relatives enough that they did have children? In that case, your genes may be passed on. If not, then you may be selecting against yourself. Selection absolutely applies to humans, however. It's part of how we got smarter than other animals; competition between one another in complex social games, resulting in smarter humans having more children.

Suicide is something that I think does result in lower fitness for most individuals, but it is possible that it is an evolutionary advantage. There are people like myself, who were initially beneficial for society, and for improving the wellbeing of others in my close family. Then, after a certain point, my usefulness ended. Having a gene that induces suicidal thoughts in a person like me would thus be beneficial, a fitness advantage; because I would further increase the number of those with that suicidal gene.

I think it would be extremely unethical for me to have children, because my children (especially my sons) would probably suffer tremendously, and I know that from the start. So I probably won't ever have children, and thus will make the world a better place.