Survival of the Adequate

[bannedtechnology]

Hello all,

As a biologist by trade, I always find the topic of evolution to be quite interesting.
While this topic has clearly been addressed throughly on this site, I thought I would make point for discussion:

While "survival of the fittest" is a often seen as the central theme of evolution, it was never expressed in this manner by Darwin and can be expressed as a 'layman' term. Evolution is better described as 'survival of the adequate', meaning those adequate enough to survuve to reproducing age and reproduce will pass their genes on to the next generation. This partially explains why the process of evolution does not attain perfection and why species often carry fatal genetic predispositons.

Cheers

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Glad that's settled.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

I think we could strip this down further to "survival of those who survived to reproduce." Considering the number of people who don't seem to understand even this fundamental concept, we should really break it down to the nuts and bolts for them.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

Hello all,

As a biologist by trade, I always find the topic of evolution to be quite interesting.
While this topic has clearly been addressed throughly on this site, I thought I would make point for discussion:

While "survival of the fittest" is a often seen as the central theme of evolution, it was never expressed in this manner by Darwin and can be expressed as a 'layman' term. Evolution is better described as 'survival of the adequate', meaning those adequate enough to survuve to reproducing age and reproduce will pass their genes on to the next generation. This partially explains why the process of evolution does not attain perfection and why species often carry fatal genetic predispositons.

Cheers

We can call this "Murpy's Evolutionary Law."

 

[sandy whitelinger]

I think we could strip this down further to "survival of those who survived to reproduce." Considering the number of people who don't seem to understand even this fundamental concept, we should really break it down to the nuts and bolts for them.

The movie "Idiocracy" addressed this. the plot was basically that the really smart people thought the world was too messed up to bring a child into while the ignorant trailer trash reproduced like bunnies. Eventually the world was populated by bubbas.

 

[Valjean]

But we do get some truly excellent designs* from time to time: jellyfish, crocodiles, sharks, ferns...

(* creationists.... don't! :tsk

Welcome, Bannedtech

 

[LoTrobador]

I think we could strip this down further to "survival of those who survived to reproduce."

"Reproduction of those, who - for one reason or another - did somehow manage to survive up to that point in their lives, while others did not" maybe?

 

[bannedtechnology]

I think we could strip this down further to "survival of those who survived to reproduce." Considering the number of people who don't seem to understand even this fundamental concept, we should really break it down to the nuts and bolts for them.

I like the idea of further stripping this down, how about:

"survival of those attractive, clever or lucky enough to successfully fornicate"

 

[Daemon Sophic]

I like the idea of further stripping this down, how about:

"survival of those attractive, clever or lucky enough to successfully fornicate"

Nah. You still have the attractive, clever, or lucky who fornicate......but are sterile. :sorry1:
Perhaps a boon for them personally. But still a genetic dead end.

But I like your OP. It really is 'survival of the good enough', or words to that effect.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Or, more precisely, the survival of the lucky.

Fitness has something to do with it, but the fittest may simply not live long enough to reproduce due to unpredicted variables, leaving the least of these to multiply.

Nature is not a control by which we can isolate it with rationality and mathematical certainty. It's wild.

 

[bannedtechnology]

Or, more precisely, the survival of the lucky.

Fitness has something to do with it, but the fittest may simply not live long enough to reproduce due to unpredicted variables, leaving the least of these to multiply.

Nature is not a control by which we can isolate it with rationality and mathematical certainty. It's wild.

The fact that some individuals in a species are lucky is elementary biology. So is the fact that the fittest individuals do not always reproduce due to unforseen circumstances.
The reproductive ability of a species occurs on a gradient: the least fit reproduce the lease, and the most fit reproduce the most (however, there are few of these individuals). Overall, it would look like a bell curve.

Due to the fact that most individuals in a species would not be classificed as "extremely fit", the majority of reproduction would occur in the middle (the adequate).

Nature by definition is wild, but evolution is not a wild crap shoot; it is basic statistics. On an individual level, it may seem random, but on a species level it will follow a general trend.

 

[Sunstone]

Eventually the world was populated by bubbas.

I take it the movie is a documentary?

 

[Sunstone]

I think it would be very difficult to understand evolution without thinking in terms of probabilities.

 

[camanintx]

I like to think of evolution as a pass/fail course as opposed to being graded on a scale. It doesn't care what is better or best, just what is good enough.

 

[Gabethewiking]

This is an interesting point. Take me for example, I got a huge penis, and this, you may think, would be good. But as my wife (and other partners in life) have a limited, erh, entrance, some of them do not enjoy the fact of my large manhood.

Of course, size does not promise Quality, but i wanted A excuse to mention my enormous penis, that is all.. Cherrio...

 

[Sunstone]

...but i wanted A excuse to mention my enormous penis, that is all.. Cherrio...

I agree with your claim that you are an American.

 

[fantome profane]

This is an interesting point. Take me for example, I got a huge penis, and this, you may think, would be good. But as my wife (and other partners in life) have a limited, erh, entrance, some of them do not enjoy the fact of my large manhood.

Of course, size does not promise Quality, but i wanted A excuse to mention my enormous penis, that is all.. Cherrio...

Did you mean to say you “got one”, or did you mean to say you “are one”?

 

[BHSU_Student]

We are already living in an idiocracy. Humanity is devolving as we speak!

 

[meogi]

This is why evolution is a sieve rather than a ladder.

 

[painted wolf]

Hello all,

As a biologist by trade, I always find the topic of evolution to be quite interesting.
While this topic has clearly been addressed throughly on this site, I thought I would make point for discussion:

While "survival of the fittest" is a often seen as the central theme of evolution, it was never expressed in this manner by Darwin and can be expressed as a 'layman' term. Evolution is better described as 'survival of the adequate', meaning those adequate enough to survuve to reproducing age and reproduce will pass their genes on to the next generation. This partially explains why the process of evolution does not attain perfection and why species often carry fatal genetic predispositons.

Cheers

Welcome...Always great to have another biologist around! :jiggy:

I do believe that Darwin did use "survival of the fittest" in the fifth edition of "Origin" but you are right.. it was Spencer who coined the term.

Anyway... I think the problem lies in what people think of as "fit". There is a misconception that "fitness" means being physically perfect for a given environment. While Darwin viewed fitness as simply the ability to produce offspring that would survive.

In the wild those that reproduce are by the vary nature of biological fitness... the fittest.
(thus my sister is biologically more 'fit' than I am... she has seven children, while I have just one)

wa:do