promotion image of download ymail app
Promoted
Anonymous
Anonymous asked in Science & MathematicsBiology · 9 months ago

Is Darwinian evolution about who dies, who survives, or both?

I only ever hear people talk about "Darwin awards" when someone dies.

What about when someone survives? Can it be said they get a Darwin award for surviving?

Or is Darwinism/natural selection just about which animals die off, and the survivors are just a byproduct?

10 Answers

Relevance
  • Anonymous
    9 months ago
    Favorite Answer

    'The Darwin awards' are just unofficial collections of people that have died doing stupid things. It's a joke, as it implies they are not worthy of passing their genes on to the following generation and that that is a good thing as they were stupid enough to do whatever it was that killed them.

    Darwinian evolution, outlines the mechanics of evolution, which in short, states that organisms adapt to an environment and its selection pressures, those individuals of a population that do not have advantageous genes/traits are less likely to successfully procreate. Meaning that there will be elimination of disadvantageous genes, and a concentration of advantageous ones in a population. But it's a bit more complicated than that overall, as it also delves into speciation, gene flow, mutation etc.

    • οικος
      Lv 7
      9 months agoReport

      Almost. Darwin awards are for people who remove themselves from the gene pool in a remarkably stupid manner. It is usually, but not always, posthumous. At least one person got the award for castrating himself.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 9 months ago

    Both. It's about who survives long enough to repro duce and if those off spring survive long enough to also reproduce. It really is survival of the fittest. Individuals die, but the species and culture survives and evolves. I have no offspring, but Ive made contributions to society so my legacy will survive. The family traditions die when I die because I have no siblings and neither did either of my parents. BUT they were both teachers. My father mentored MANY graduate students. So did my mother, and especially her mother. She was a high school principal for 22 years.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    9 months ago

    A Darwin award is for someone who dies before they reproduce. It's a cruel joke.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Jim
    Lv 7
    9 months ago

    I've stopped answering Anonymous questions

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Zirp
    Lv 7
    9 months ago

    no, it's about which genetic traits get passed on to posterity more than other genetic traits

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 9 months ago

    "Darwin Awards" is just a joke web site, so take a look.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Cowboy
    Lv 6
    9 months ago

    Evolution does not involve individuals at all - only populations evolve - it can takes generations. Natural selection is about individual fitness - basically surviving long enough to reproduce and just how many offspring you leave who become parents on their own.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • MARK
    Lv 7
    9 months ago

    The 'Darwin Awards' have nothing to do with serious science.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    9 months ago

    It is not. Darwin is about evolution, or how one species can change into another species through time and natural selection. Natural selection is not necessarily life and death. For example, Darwin suggests there is natural variation in a wild population of animals and plants. Some are more successful in survival or reproduction than other individuals because they have better traits that are heritable. That means good genes can be passed along to future generations and increase in frequency without individuals having worse genes being killed off. Take for example, elephant seals. The males are huge and they battle each other for the right to mate. The losers are sometimes killed but in most cases they are not, but because they cannot mate, their genes (which codes for a smaller, weaker body) are eliminated. As a result male elephant seals evolved to be bigger and bigger until they become their current size. even though the beaches are not littered with the dead bodies of males. Instead males that lose will move to a different area and they will try again the next breeding season.

    So, even though genes may not necessarily determine who lives and who dies, evolution can still happen simply because some individuals leave more descendants than others because they have better genes. Take for example, the human penis. The human penis is the longest among all primates. Did it evolve because only males with the longest penis survive? The answer is no. Humans evolved a long penis because the ancestor of humans was promiscuous. They lived in social groups and in a dangerous environment on the African savanna. They need to band together to fight off lions and hyenas. Because they risk their lives for each other, they cannot make others angry and resentful by excluding them from having sex. That means sex is a free for all among our ancestors. Having a mutation that got rid of the penile bone (humans are the only primate without a penile bone) to allow the penis to grow to a large size became very advantageous, since a long penis can put sperm closer to the uterus than a short one can. The sperms of a person with long penis have less distance to travel before reaching the egg. So, even though having a long penis does not make it more likely to survive and less likely to be killed, the advantage of having a long penis is so big that all living humans are descendants of the first individual that lost the penile bone through a mutation.

    Of course, humans are no longer promiscuous. Monogamy is the rule in most societies around the world, probably because of the invention of agriculture made it unnecessary to live a nomadic hunter/gatherer lifestyle. There is no longer any need to band together with other males to defend a group if one can grow enough food to live with one's own family in a structurally sound house that can keep predators out instead of a tent that can be quickly moved as a group migrates. No longer is a long penis necessary for fatherhood, if one can keep one's woman from having sex with other men. As a result, penis size in some societies have decreased, simply because a short one is no longer a disadvantage. The average size of the penis is less in some countries than in others, not because people with long penis are more likely to die, but because mutations that result in a shorter penis are no longer as harmful as they once were when people had to share their women with other men. The long penis has lost its advantage because of monogamy. Darwin points out that just a small advantage (instead of life and death) is all that is needed for a particular heritable trait to become universal or nearly .so. People simply misinterpret Darwin, often deliberately, to try to justify harsh policies such social Darwinism, or the refusal to help those who are in need. Nothing in Darwin's theory or writings support such inhumane and inhuman policies.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 9 months ago

    Darwinism is about having the smarts to survive what some others couldn't.

    Darwinian Evolution isn't a thing, it's just Evolution.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.