If genes purpose is to survive and create survival machines then why woud it create altuiristic machines as well? Well, they don't, altuirism is against the gene's purpose and therefore against nature's purpose. Then why are some animals altuiristic, they are not. As explained in the "cave" theory and in the "never brake lines" theory, behavior that may seem altuiristic is acctually selfish, it just creates some colateral damge that seems to help others. We absolutelly never help others just because of the sake of helping, even volunteer charity work is selfish, we do it for many selfish reasons, maybe because of social pressure, or to feel good about ourselves or to make us feel better than others, or many reasons that we end up focusing on ourselves and our needs. We need people to be selfish, you cant be selfish on your own, it wont make a difference, as much as you cant be altuiristic on your own. Thats were the "Prisoner's Dilema" game comes in.
Tit for Tat vs. Tit for Tat was the winning strategy and it fits perfectly with my logic, in Tit for tat both players won points by helping out each other, not as much points as they could win by taking advantage of the other, but they won a good accumulative amount. This may seem as alturistic behavior but it is acctually done because its the best outcome for the player. Since the point of the game is not to see who has more points but to have many points then thi was the best winning strategy for you, you, not the other person, you! You chose this strategy so you would have many points, not for your opponent to have many points as well.
There are no alturistic beings, they would be the first ones to get screwed over and the first ones to die. This is certain, however this does not eliminate alturism from the survival equation. Alturistic behavior is a very benefitial attitude for survival however it can only work if its done out of the most self-centered, selfish intentions.
martes, 15 de mayo de 2012
In Genes We Trust
In many ways God is like Genes, I dont believe in God but from what I've heard He is a direct translation, in over simplistic but logical terms, to genes. I will right this pretending I believe because if I right it as an atheist then it woud be a blog about genes, not God and genes. Genes define us, they decide if we have blue or green eyes, if we are tall or small, they have even discused that it defines are sexual inclination. God did the same thing, apparently he made us all out of clay and sculpted us carefully, he defined us and even set a purpose for us in life. Genes also set a purpose for us, they created us and defined us so we would mantain their longevity. It is said that we chose to spread the word of God and perpetuate his "life" by preaching and shoving it down other people's mouth, but if God predetermined our lives from the get go then he is doing this himself. God as well as genes are bigger that us, they are part of a much important and bigger picture and because of this they use us but thats just the way we fit in this bigger picture.
One of the questions that arose when I decided to drop my faith was: if God doesn't exist then why was he invented? Well if God and Genes are so alike and we found out about God first then our discovery of them must have originated from the same curiosity and question. Why are we here? Why do we exist? These questions are so overwhelming that we would do anything to stop the from eating us alive, even if it means blindingly following three letters that together rhyme with "gob". The God we made is a perfect answer to a problem, however it has no data to back it up but who cares, we are only trying to convince ourselves, and we dont need facts for that. This is the point were genes step into the picture and I have to put my foot down and say what the frog. Genes tell us why we are here, who we are and why we are good for, what else do you want? There answer is not very encouraging since they pretty much tell us we are vessels for their continuity, just like the poor hostages of Alien. Even though they don't give us an inpiring, divine answer to our question, they acctually answer it, with facts!
Even though I could keep on plastering my frustration, I musn't. Im afraid I have gone completely off topic with this blog however the explanation lies on the chapter, it was way to scientific and as ignorant as that sounds, I found it really hard to expand on, so I chose the easy way out and talked about religion, a topic that I could talk about until I get kicked out of a church.
One of the questions that arose when I decided to drop my faith was: if God doesn't exist then why was he invented? Well if God and Genes are so alike and we found out about God first then our discovery of them must have originated from the same curiosity and question. Why are we here? Why do we exist? These questions are so overwhelming that we would do anything to stop the from eating us alive, even if it means blindingly following three letters that together rhyme with "gob". The God we made is a perfect answer to a problem, however it has no data to back it up but who cares, we are only trying to convince ourselves, and we dont need facts for that. This is the point were genes step into the picture and I have to put my foot down and say what the frog. Genes tell us why we are here, who we are and why we are good for, what else do you want? There answer is not very encouraging since they pretty much tell us we are vessels for their continuity, just like the poor hostages of Alien. Even though they don't give us an inpiring, divine answer to our question, they acctually answer it, with facts!
Even though I could keep on plastering my frustration, I musn't. Im afraid I have gone completely off topic with this blog however the explanation lies on the chapter, it was way to scientific and as ignorant as that sounds, I found it really hard to expand on, so I chose the easy way out and talked about religion, a topic that I could talk about until I get kicked out of a church.
domingo, 13 de mayo de 2012
Learn from Your Mistakes
To me and in a not scientific point of view the word "evolution" has a rather positive conotation. Evolution often gives the impresion of improvement and the action of bettering in whatever way possible by undergoing some kind of transformation. Even in Pokemon when a pokemon "evolves" it transforms into a stronger, bigger and in that case, cooler pokemon. On the other hand, a mistake is by definition a bad, wrong thing that should not have happened and thats why it is a mistake. If this path of logic is right, then in what way is evolution a mistake?
When evolution happens it doesn't come premeditated or planned, it just happens because an imperfection, just like a mistake, and in this logic it makes perfect sense, that evolution is a mistakes. However the most facinating part of evolution is the outcome and in parralel, regarding the mistake, consequence. The "evolution" we know about is the one of the stupid, unrefined monkey and how it was carefully molded, sculped and crafted into the beautiful, perfect being we are today and if some of the consequences that come from my mistakes were as good as this I would be much more of a screw up. That leaves the other kinds of evolution, like the things that we call malformations, diseases, shames and other names. When in meoisis an extra cromosone is produced it is by no doubt a mistake as much as the evolution of the monkey was, however the outcome is very different. A son with Down syndrome is not "better", it's not an "improvement", at least not how we see it, but it's still evolution. Even saying that a retarded kid is evoution sounds incredibly wrong, however it is, that is if we follow the given logic and explanation of evolution.
In that case the question remaining is why have we evolved for the good, why has evolution, for the most part, have improved us? Then it would seem reasonable that the mistakes are just the consequences of some mistakes that result in unfortunate mistakes like a child with Down syndrome. Then are we mistakes that mistakenly become a consequence that is not a mistake. As a teenager with existencialist problems, like many others, this has not been a soothing exercise, so...am I a mistake?
When evolution happens it doesn't come premeditated or planned, it just happens because an imperfection, just like a mistake, and in this logic it makes perfect sense, that evolution is a mistakes. However the most facinating part of evolution is the outcome and in parralel, regarding the mistake, consequence. The "evolution" we know about is the one of the stupid, unrefined monkey and how it was carefully molded, sculped and crafted into the beautiful, perfect being we are today and if some of the consequences that come from my mistakes were as good as this I would be much more of a screw up. That leaves the other kinds of evolution, like the things that we call malformations, diseases, shames and other names. When in meoisis an extra cromosone is produced it is by no doubt a mistake as much as the evolution of the monkey was, however the outcome is very different. A son with Down syndrome is not "better", it's not an "improvement", at least not how we see it, but it's still evolution. Even saying that a retarded kid is evoution sounds incredibly wrong, however it is, that is if we follow the given logic and explanation of evolution.
In that case the question remaining is why have we evolved for the good, why has evolution, for the most part, have improved us? Then it would seem reasonable that the mistakes are just the consequences of some mistakes that result in unfortunate mistakes like a child with Down syndrome. Then are we mistakes that mistakenly become a consequence that is not a mistake. As a teenager with existencialist problems, like many others, this has not been a soothing exercise, so...am I a mistake?
Suscribirse a:
Comentarios (Atom)