Evolution's Ultimate Test

[The Mucking MaDMAn]

I had this epiphany awhile ago and I dont think I'll ever lose it. After thinking hard enough about evolution and the world I came up with this conclusion. The purpose of any species is to prolong their existance for aslong as possible, while evolution constantly occurs and the most adapt animals live and exist for the longest. Much is the same case with Humans.

We certainly have had no problem "existing" through our species. Humans seem to be the end product and total goal of evolution, a creature with self-awareness and abstract thought. Because humans possess these things, their minds themselves are able to evolve, learn, solve etc. As humans mental capacity has greatly increased, we have found it easier and easier to live.

Evolution still remains a test, and as we are the most extreme success of evolution, we are to face the ultimate test. Can humans outlive the existance of our very own planet? When this world becomes uninhabitable will we be smart enough and have evolved mentally enough to be able to leave this planet and inhabit a new one? Furthermore, will Humans be able to exist forever in this universe? This seems to be the ultimate goal of evolution.

I sure hope we succeed, wouldn't want 5 billion years of evolution to go down the shitter when the earth darkens. Or hey, maybe evolution will get it right next time

But yea, i think we will succeed, space travel seems to be advancing a lot quicker than the earth deteriorating. Go humans!

[Nicaine]

Originally Posted by The Mucking MaDMAn

We certainly have had no problem "existing" through our species. Humans seem to be the end product and total goal of evolution, a creature with self-awareness and abstract thought.

The problem with this view is that evolution does not have a goal or end product; this is anthropomorphizing.

[The Mucking MaDMAn]

Is the goal of a car not to get you from point A to B? The goal of these forums is to spread useful infomation no? Perhaps purpose would've been a better word if ur a stickler for personification, i apolagize. Personally i think humans are about as much as the end product of evolution as you could get. I don't see us evolving physically anytime soon (within a couple million years) as we no longer rely on survival of the fittest but rather survival of the smartest, which seems to generally longen the life as us as a society rather than one person.

[dip]

Surviving in our deteriating envirornment is now questionable.

If we survive past that, well, our sun is roughly 5 billion years old, and has about 5 billion left.
So, we got about 5 billion years to discover how to escape, before our own production of life engulfs the planet.

The Big Bang (theory), if you believe in it.
There is no way around that. Or is there?

Evolution itself seems pointless, since life is pointless.

[seechao]

In my oppinion, the point of any species living, is not to live the longest, but to ensure the survival of the NEXT generation, as time is relative, turtles live hundreds of years while fruit flies live hours, did one "win" over the other? no, as the existance of one coincides with, and probably depends on, the other, they are not competitors, but team-mates.... the animals most addapted to survival, survive to make more babies, that survive to make more babies, etc. The only goal to evolution is evolution, not perfection, as perfectin is a human concept that is impossible to accuratly define. "a creature with self-awareness and abstract thought" is not perfection, as exempified by the imperfection of our awareness and thought, these qualities would lower the survival abilities of many creatures alive today... All animals learn, even goldfish, all minds evolve constantly, as evolution is not a one way street, everything changes, all the time, everywhere, the changes that improve you odds to survive or brred, go one to mutate some more. (side note, ask ANYONE if its easier to live now than in the past...) Our planet is here to stay, we may kill hundreds of species, millions more have already died, the weather may chage drasticly, its done worst before, humans may not survive humans, but the earth will. evolution will go on, we are not the epiphany, nor the end, of evolution, we are but a small part of it. We are still evolving, humans who have the most kids, pass on the most genes, as always. Human evolution is easy to see, go to a museum, and try to wear one of the suit of armor that those "huge" knights used to wear. Beleiving that I somehow am "better" or "more evolved" than a blade of grass, that has spend just as much time as me trying to become better than a single celled organism, is rediculus, life is a whole, all its parts are as important as all others. I'm not saying the world will go away if we destroy mosquitos or manatees, but rather that it wont go away if we die either.
We have always, and always will, rely on the survival of the fittest, however, "fittest" is not a quality that can be easily defined, or defined similarly under any sittuaion, it is differant for everyone, everything, and at every differant momment.

[bewilderment]

Originally Posted by seechao

We have always, and always will, rely on the survival of the fittest, however, "fittest" is not a quality that can be easily defined, or defined similarly under any sittuaion, it is differant for everyone, everything, and at every differant momment.

Yes, but evolutionary-wise "fittest" simply means those organisms which can produce the most offspring and thus pass on the most genes before dying. It's actually a rather simple sort of definition in the biological sense. And, it doesn't really matter how long the organism survives. Take a human for example: a man who dies at 21 yet has 8 kids would be considered more "successful" than a man who dies at 98 and has no offspring.

Now, "fit" in other ways is a different story.

[boylizard]

Originally Posted by seechao

In my oppinion, the point of any species living, is not to live the longest, but to ensure the survival of the NEXT generation, as time is relative, turtles live hundreds of years while fruit flies live hours, did one "win" over the other? no, as the existance of one coincides with, and probably depends on, the other, they are not competitors, but team-mates.... the animals most addapted to survival, survive to make more babies, that survive to make more babies, etc. The only goal to evolution is evolution, not perfection, as perfectin is a human concept that is impossible to accuratly define. "a creature with self-awareness and abstract thought" is not perfection, as exempified by the imperfection of our awareness and thought, these qualities would lower the survival abilities of many creatures alive today... All animals learn, even goldfish, all minds evolve constantly, as evolution is not a one way street, everything changes, all the time, everywhere, the changes that improve you odds to survive or brred, go one to mutate some more. (side note, ask ANYONE if its easier to live now than in the past...) Our planet is here to stay, we may kill hundreds of species, millions more have already died, the weather may chage drasticly, its done worst before, humans may not survive humans, but the earth will. evolution will go on, we are not the epiphany, nor the end, of evolution, we are but a small part of it. We are still evolving, humans who have the most kids, pass on the most genes, as always. Human evolution is easy to see, go to a museum, and try to wear one of the suit of armor that those "huge" knights used to wear. Beleiving that I somehow am "better" or "more evolved" than a blade of grass, that has spend just as much time as me trying to become better than a single celled organism, is rediculus, life is a whole, all its parts are as important as all others. I'm not saying the world will go away if we destroy mosquitos or manatees, but rather that it wont go away if we die either.
We have always, and always will, rely on the survival of the fittest, however, "fittest" is not a quality that can be easily defined, or defined similarly under any sittuaion, it is differant for everyone, everything, and at every differant momment.

I believe that the original purpose of a species, collectively, is to ensure the successive survival of the next, however, humans have become relatively, say, greedy. As a whole, I don't believe the general human populace gives a rat's ass about the next species.
I read an opinion of someone once, may have been an author, that the common cold is the most advanced, successful virus known to man. Some may say AIDS, as its very fatal, but thats the counter-argument - the common cold rarely kills and sticks around long enough to be passed on, and passed on it usually is. It doesn't kill it's host, it uses it and moves on, to come back later, and usually doesn't do much damage to the host if any at all. Humanity is... a leech on the face of the planet. I am no tree-hugger, but we aren't kind to Mother Earth by any stretch of the imagination.

Originally Posted by seechao

We have always, and always will, rely on the survival of the fittest, however, "fittest" is not a quality that can be easily defined, or defined similarly under any sittuaion, it is differant for everyone, everything, and at every differant momment.

Fittest is a blanket term for too many different categories - population, domination, adaptation, etc. We, as humans, definitely do not control the population portion, but domination may be.


---

I would like to suggest the idea of virii being some of the most evolved things on this planet. Granted, they are not technically alive by scientific standards, but look at em. They are efficient, everywhere, and thus far incurable - only preventable by vaccination (and we could 'vaccinate' an area against humans easily enough)

[bewilderment]

The human species isn't the ultimate product of evolution and there are many more species which have been here longer than we have and will probably be here long after we've gone. I had a brilliant philosophy professor once comment on the consciousness saying that it may not be the best thing in an evolutionary-sense. For example, dinosaurs survived longer than humans currently have and were less developed in a cognitive sense. And, some species of bugs have been around forever as have many bacteria.

Consciousness has helped us survive merely because we can manipulate our environment in a way no other species can. But, this isn't necessarily the best thing. It's very possible that we are going to screw it up and kill ourselves off through technology. In that case, it would be better in an evolutionary sense that we never had such advanced cognitive abilities to develop such technology in the first place. Or, we may wise-up and be able to survive for an extremely long period of time due to technology, but I'm not feeling very confident about that currently with all of the wars still going on.

As a side note, evolution isn't about survival of a species per sec, but of genes.

[The Mucking MaDMAn]

Originally Posted by bewilderment

The human species isn't the ultimate product of evolution and there are many more species which have been here longer than we have and will probably be here long after we've gone. I had a brilliant philosophy professor once comment on the consciousness saying that it may not be the best thing in an evolutionary-sense. For example, dinosaurs survived longer than humans currently have and were less developed in a cognitive sense. And, some species of bugs have been around forever as have many bacteria.

Consciousness has helped us survive merely because we can manipulate our environment in a way no other species can. But, this isn't necessarily the best thing. It's very possible that we are going to screw it up and kill ourselves off through technology. In that case, it would be better in an evolutionary sense that we never had such advanced cognitive abilities to develop such technology in the first place. Or, we may wise-up and be able to survive for an extremely long period of time due to technology, but I'm not feeling very confident about that currently with all of the wars still going on.

As a side note, evolution isn't about survival of a species per sec, but of genes.

I really cannot see how u could not think that consciousness is one of the best outcomes of evolution. And stating that dinosaurs lived in a period longer that how long humans have currently lived doesnt really make a point at all. My main point is that humans are by far the most advanced species, that they have pretty much stopped evolving because even the "weak gened" are substantially helped out by the rest, to the point where their reproduction of "weak gened" is no problem. Perhaps we shall become more immune to more diseases, which will than evolve past our immunity, and henceforth, but thats the only real evolution i see for us.

I see Humans as the most ideal evolution for this planet because we are the only species that would be capable of leaving this planet, and having our genes and species outlive the very planet that created us. Which goes on the very fact of evolution of attempting to reproduce and pass your genes for as long as possible. Every single animal on this planet will go exctint in time (especially when the earth is no longer a habitable planet) and the only species that is possible of emigrating from this planet is humans, making them the ultimate goal of "this planet's" evolution.

[boylizard]

Originally Posted by The Mucking MaDMAn

I really cannot see how u could not think that consciousness is one of the best outcomes of evolution. And stating that dinosaurs lived in a period longer that how long humans have currently lived doesnt really make a point at all. My main point is that humans are by far the most advanced species, that they have pretty much stopped evolving because even the "weak gened" are substantially helped out by the rest, to the point where their reproduction of "weak gened" is no problem. Perhaps we shall become more immune to more diseases, which will than evolve past our immunity, and henceforth, but thats the only real evolution i see for us.

I see Humans as the most ideal evolution for this planet because we are the only species that would be capable of leaving this planet, and having our genes and species outlive the very planet that created us. Which goes on the very fact of evolution of attempting to reproduce and pass your genes for as long as possible. Every single animal on this planet will go exctint in time (especially when the earth is no longer a habitable planet) and the only species that is possible of emigrating from this planet is humans, making them the ultimate goal of "this planet's" evolution.

Pardon for the double post, but consciousness is perhaps a detriment because it introduces things like 'pride', 'ego', 'individuality'... Which have oftentimes proven the very opposite of good for the species as a whole.

[bewilderment]

Originally Posted by The Mucking MaDMAn

I really cannot see how u could not think that consciousness is one of the best outcomes of evolution. And stating that dinosaurs lived in a period longer that how long humans have currently lived doesnt really make a point at all. My main point is that humans are by far the most advanced species, that they have pretty much stopped evolving because even the "weak gened" are substantially helped out by the rest, to the point where their reproduction of "weak gened" is no problem. Perhaps we shall become more immune to more diseases, which will than evolve past our immunity, and henceforth, but thats the only real evolution i see for us.

I didn't say that consciousness isn't the best thing to come out of evolution, but merely that it isn't necessarily the best thing for survival of a species. Because of consciousness, we have come up with the means to destroy the world and ourselves. It can go either way, it all depends on the development of morality. And, it does matter in terms of evolution what species survive the longest. We may survive longer than other species in the long-run, but it hasn't been proven yet.

I'm only speaking in terms of evolution. I think consciousness and intelligence are incredibly important, but evolution has no telos. It's a process with no end goal. It just is...it's how species originate and adapt and that's all. But, that's BIOLOGICAL evolution. Actually, Darwin didn't want to use the term "evolution" at all because it somehow implied advancement.

Have you ever read Ray Kurzweil? He has some interesting ideas. One is that the human species no longer has to rely on biological evolution and we've taken things into our own hands via technology. Technology is the new evolution as far as humans are concerned.

I see Humans as the most ideal evolution for this planet because we are the only species that would be capable of leaving this planet, and having our genes and species outlive the very planet that created us. Which goes on the very fact of evolution of attempting to reproduce and pass your genes for as long as possible. Every single animal on this planet will go exctint in time (especially when the earth is no longer a habitable planet) and the only species that is possible of emigrating from this planet is humans, making them the ultimate goal of "this planet's" evolution.

Humans aren't the most ideal evolution FOR this planet because we can leave it. We are trashing it because instead of adapting to our environment, we are manipulating our environment to suit our own needs. At this point, we need other species to maintain the equilibrium of this planet which is not "our's" and we're killing them because we are the best predator around. Now, if we can survive long enough and develop technology to leave and keep our genes surviving then we will be the most advanced species (whatever "advanced" means), but it hasn't happened yet and it may never happen. And, at that point, who's to say we'll even need genes anyway?

[Strungreality]

Whoever argues against consciousness for reason of ego and other culturally learned things isn't looking at the picture right. Blaming consciousness for destruction and domination is like blaming drugs for the actions of the individual.

[Hlucn8]

I'm a creationist.

[Hlucn8]

Originally Posted by Hlucn8

I'm a creationist.

Excuse me. Swim is a creationist, I have no opinion. Thank you.

[Riconoen {UGC}]

I think our ultimate goal is to end up like the Q on Star Trek.

[namooP]

(A little off topic, but if I don\'t find this out it will bug me forever. What was the guy who plays Data in recently? Something on TV...... He was on a plane, thats all I remember. There were subtle references to Star Trek.)

Maybe a kind of hive mind thing? Its till not a definitive goal though.

Buddhist enlightenment/moksha (I\'m spouting waffle, someone who knows better then me please elaborate on what I\'m trying to say) is a bit like the oblivion and ego loss some experience on high doses of psychedelics. Because it involves to complete loss of ambition to improve oneself, wouldnt that be a final goal?