Evolution makes mistakes

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by Agirgis1, Jan 7, 2018.

  1. Agirgis1

    Agirgis1 Forum Royalty

    Hey guys, today on another ponder it is time to explore what you believe are mistakes in human emotions/psyche/instincts.

    I'm actually really interested to have different types of people's perspective on this, due to peoples different life experiences the answers might theoretically differ more than one would logically predict. (or not)

    A simplistic example of this would be the "glitch" (or any other word that classifies something being abused in a way not intended by design) in the human pleasure/reward system (drugs/gambling etc..)

    It is interesting to note that emotions are encouraging and discouraging, such as a double-edged blade.

    An example of rejection and ego, the ego makes one fear rejection, yet it is the same ego that helps one overcome the blow of rejection. Although the ego itself makes the rejection more painful, without ego one would not have the encouragement to even attempt in the first place.

    The first and last statement of the above example contradict, yet both are true, such is the complexity of the human mind

    I have a lot of different concepts I've been personally pondering that would lead to more interesting discussions if you guys enjoy such things.

    EDIT FROM COMMENTS:
     
    Last edited: Jan 8, 2018
  2. Geressen

    Geressen Forum Royalty

    your title is wrong.

    evolution is incapable of making mistakes because it is a side effect of the way life is. it has no goal or purpose.

    there is variation, sometimes in repeating patterns because of evolutionary stable strategies. sometimes on bell curves. some behaviour is rooted in biological/psychological needs (instinctual) others are taught by the enviroment or the social group.

    I think you mean "Not expected in a wild/natural enviroment" because the brain having a strong system in it that motivates behaviour that in "the wild" would mean succes and the difference between survival and death is not by design.
     
    Last edited: Jan 7, 2018
  3. Sokolov

    Sokolov The One True Cactuar Desert Owl Games

    It depends on your definition of "mistake."

    The process of evolution, in the current theory, doesn't make "mistakes" because it, in of itself, doesn't have a goal. The fact that species who stay alive evolve further isn't "by design" (unless you believe God designed evolution) so much as a consequence of how random variations and mutations would work when coupled with generational reproduction systems.

    Thus, something that may have served a species well for a long time may suddenly become obsolete or even harmful. For example, in Planet Earth 2, they show a species of crab which, due to the introduction of ants to their habitat, is now in grave danger and losing population rapidly because their "evolution" didn't prepare them for such an invader.
     
  4. Agirgis1

    Agirgis1 Forum Royalty

    But it does, I once read an academic paper where it described evolutions purpose as "to maximize reproductive success, not happiness" and I tend to agree that although evolution is indeed a reactionary process, it does however have a purpose to its existence.

    But this brings up another question, did evolution come about as a reaction to something, hence some-what inventing itself? or is it part of some sort of core "version alpha" of humans.
     
  5. Agirgis1

    Agirgis1 Forum Royalty

    I suppose you're both right in the sense that evolution may truly just be a random process of reactions. But it is intriguing how far our "coding" can be damaging to us in the current state of the modern world, happiness, one of the genetic rewards for achievement has become the goal, almost as if by design of our system. Yet the system never accounted (or doesn't care because it's just a reaction) for the irony of how unhappy working to happiness can make you. A beautiful joke quote that isn't' far from reality
    "Do cocaine, to work hard, to earn more, to do more coke", entertaining as that is, it does have some truth to the way people live.
     
  6. Geressen

    Geressen Forum Royalty

    evolution is a consequence of reproductive succes in a species that has variation in a challenging enviroment. it would be better to say that selection doesnt factor in happiness but only reproductive succes.

    you are likely taking that sentence out of context.
     
    Last edited: Jan 8, 2018
  7. Geressen

    Geressen Forum Royalty

    why is wind? what purpose is wind? who made the wind?

    *sounds of pain and agony*

    you are just as bad as people that think DNA contains information and so someone had to put the information there, DNa is information and evolution IS the reaction

    no. again just because you want there to be something greater and mystical doesn't make it so.
     
  8. Agirgis1

    Agirgis1 Forum Royalty

    The full quote:

    "Understanding emotional disorders requires understanding the evolutionary origins and functions of normal emotions. They are special states, shaped by natural selection to adjust various aspects of the organism in ways that have tended to give a selective advantage in the face of the adaptive challenges characteristic of a particular kind of situation. They are designed to maximize reproductive success, not happiness."
     
  9. Geressen

    Geressen Forum Royalty

    that says emotions and mental states are evolved for reproductive succes not for happines.
    because the beings who were always happy but didnt have reproductive succes... didn't pass the selection
     
  10. Agirgis1

    Agirgis1 Forum Royalty

    There's a misunderstanding here, you think I'm trying to argue from some-sort of god/mystical spirit, the reality is I do no such thing, I am simply more intrigued in the reasoning behind the curtain if you will.
    Infact my very argument that even nature makes mistakes, should have shown that I don't believe in such "higher powers". But I am also not boring enough to simply think of it as nothing more than a random reaction.
     
  11. Agirgis1

    Agirgis1 Forum Royalty

    " academic paper where it described evolutions purpose as "to maximize reproductive success, not happiness"


    "you are likely taking that sentence out of context. "

    Simply quoted to show context was indeed relevant
     
  12. Geressen

    Geressen Forum Royalty

    you said the paper said the purpose of evolution
    that quote is about the purpose of emotions
    these are both words that start with E.
    but they are not the same thing.
    the difference means that while you were wrong the paper was in fact correct.
     
  13. Geressen

    Geressen Forum Royalty

    my stance is that by supposing there is a reasoning and a curtain you have already made errors.
     
  14. Agirgis1

    Agirgis1 Forum Royalty

    The paper is about the evolution of emotions (more specifically the paper as a whole was about evolution of emotions and rationality). This quite clearly falls under the topic of evolution. (Since my entire first post is about emotion/instinctive evolution after all.)
     
  15. Agirgis1

    Agirgis1 Forum Royalty

    Good point, I need to shift the argument a bit, I actually do believe strongly in randomness as it's something I learned very early on in the field of finance and economics. But more so than examining what led to the current "glitches" caused by evolution, I'm more geared towards I) What they are II) How we can adapt against them in the future (without the help of further evolution due to time-frame that would require, I assume)
     
    Last edited: Jan 8, 2018
  16. Geressen

    Geressen Forum Royalty

    look at the following 2 sentences:

    "the evolutionary purpose of emotions"
    "the purpose of evolution"

    do you understand the difference?
     
  17. Geressen

    Geressen Forum Royalty

    that is interesting. you mean how would you try to manage the addictive nature of our brains to actions that bring us a sense of win without literally taking the joy out of everything.
     
  18. Agirgis1

    Agirgis1 Forum Royalty

    Well the first sentence isn't even correct in English
    The purpose of..... evolutionary purpose...... of emotions.? what does that even mean, there is at least 1 purpose too many in that sentence.

    "The purpose of evolution of emotions"
    "The purpose of evolution"
    Assuming this is the version you meant to express, they do both fall under almost the same answer, the first question is simply a sub-category of the main answer; not entirely different concepts.
     
  19. Agirgis1

    Agirgis1 Forum Royalty

    Yes, that is one of the "glitches" , other than that I'd like to also see what other glitches we can come up with. Maybe less obvious ones.
     
  20. Geressen

    Geressen Forum Royalty

    sorry I got distracted its fixed now.
    yes I am blaming it on the dog.
     

Share This Page