Does the gene pool really improve if stupid people die?

[hbarcat]

There’s no selection pressure?

You have to take my quote exactly as written.

". . . we protect our children so well from maladaptive traits that natural selection doesn't really operate on us as a species any more. We sort of practice an unintentional form of artificial selection on ourselves."

We are still evolving and the process is necessarily selective. It's just in a modified form than it would be if we still lived as hunter-gatherers without civilization.

Tell that to a guy who is short, bald, dumb, obese, etc. Add poor in there as well.

A person who was short, bald, dumb, and obese would have had a difficult time reproducing among our ancestors in their natural environment. They have an easier time today when society often values other traits as status symbols. You can be famous as a musician, actor, athlete, or entertainer and have your pick of sexual partners even if you're ugly as a mule's butt. Politicians and other individuals in positions of power enjoy the same access to mates.

You mentioned money. That helps a lot.

 

[Member8675309]

You have to take my quote exactly as written.

". . . we protect our children so well from maladaptive traits that natural selection doesn't really operate on us as a species any more. We sort of practice an unintentional form of artificial selection on ourselves."

We are still evolving and the process is necessarily selective. It's just in a modified form than it would be if we still lived as hunter-gatherers without civilization.




A person who was short, bald, dumb, and obese would have had a difficult time reproducing among our ancestors in their natural environment. They have an easier time today when society often values other traits as status symbols. You can be famous as a musician, actor, athlete, or entertainer and have your pick of sexual partners even if you're ugly as a mule's butt. Politicians and other individuals in positions of power enjoy the same access to mates.

You mentioned money. That helps a lot.

Oh yes, I agree. I could reeeeeek of butt sweat all day, every day, but if I have a few million, I’ll still have myself a swarm of hunnies to choose from. But, no, I don’t have millions....yet....so I’m going to go take myself and run a few laps.

 

[NeilGB]

I used to agree with this but now I think it (the protections society has put in place) is most likely a short term interruption in the evolutionary trajectory of humans. As a species we remain incapable of reacting effectively to threats of climate change, environmental changes, etc that will most likely have significant impacts on the survival of the current version of the human genome. Natural selection will take care of that over the coming generations and evolution will get back on track (albeit a potentially different track).

". . . we protect our children so well from maladaptive traits that natural selection doesn't really operate on us as a species any more. We sort of practice an unintentional form of artificial selection on ourselves."

 

[Bob_Ross]

None of which takes away from the premise that death from dumbarserery removes dumbarse genes from the pool.

But that's a red herring; it would only be notable if we could show that dumbarsery was transmitted genetically.
Or, to put it another way: Death from dumbarsery might remove dumarses from the (gene) pool, but since there is (ostensibly) no such thing as a "dumbarse gene" the net result is not reflected in the genetic composition of subsequent generations.

...which doesn't mean that removing dumbarses from the population doesn't (necessarily) skew the descendants of the resulting population away from dumbarsery...it just means that those changes wouldn't occur as a result of genetics.

 

[Downunderwonder]

But that's a red herring; it would only be notable if we could show that dumbarsery was transmitted genetically.
Or, to put it another way: Death from dumbarsery might remove dumarses from the (gene) pool, but since there is (ostensibly) no such thing as a "dumbarse gene" the net result is not reflected in the genetic composition of subsequent generations.

...which doesn't mean that removing dumbarses from the population doesn't (necessarily) skew the descendants of the resulting population away from dumbarsery...it just means that those changes wouldn't occur as a result of genetics.

Dumbarses are as dumbarses do. No doubt there are multiple genes involved.

Too much red herring social engineering factoring in this thread.

 

[TOOL460002]

Yes

 

[toowrongfoo]

Well let's see. I'm a 2 + 2 kinda person.

We've had written history since x year. We haven't changed much (other than tech) so it's easy math. No need to get all caught up in rhetorical minutiae.