Evolution in terms of social decision making

Philosophy Forums Philosophy
1

What is needed is another look at what human beings are…
and we begin right at the beginning, that of evolution…

We are animals that were turned into human beings by
evolution… and what exactly is evolution?

Evolution: is the change in the heritable characteristics of
biological populations over successive generations,
driven by mechanisms like natural selection, mutations,
and genetic drift… within natural selection, individuals
better adapted to their environment are more likely to
survive and reproduce, passing on advantageous traits…
today, we are not dealing with large-scale, long term
changes that lead to the creation of new species…
we are dealing with microevolution, small scale changes in
gene frequency within a population over a few generations…

and what traits should we have now becomes the question…
What traits are desirable traits? What traits should we be encouraging
or working on?

Given that human beings are social creatures that must depend
on others to achieve our own personal goals and needs, it would
seem to me, that to reach our own goals/needs, we must have
the cooperation of others… and that is the trait we should
be working on… the need for human beings to cooperate is
fundamental for human beings to survive and reproduce…

This tells us that those ideologies/isms that drive individualism,
only the strong survive and Rugged individualism is the opposite to
the basic ideas of evolution…Rugged individualism is a term
that indicates that an individual is self-reliant and independent from
outside (usually government or some other form of collective) assistance
or support. The fact of matter is that we no longer live in a situation
where Rugged Individualism does not or cannot work…

MLK in the ‘‘other America’’ a speech he gave on March 10,1968,
and he said:

This country has socialism for the rich, rugged individualism
for the poor’’

And he is right… Elon Musk has received over 38 billion dollars
in estimated government contracts, subsidies, tax credits and loans
since 2003… and Tesla has received over 11 billion dollars in
regulatory credits since 2014… or roughly 8 million dollars a day from
federal contracts…

he has built his vast wealth on federal subsidies… must be nice…
and why isn’t he being investigated for where his subsidies go?
the right wants investigations of individuals, preferable ‘‘Welfare’’
recipients, but not on the wealthy like Musk… why the double
standard?

So, anyway, if Musk is getting billions in federal subsidies,
where does this idea of Rugged Individualism come in? if
he is actually a proponent of Rugged Individualism,
then he should be able to justify his 8 million a day in federal
subsidies, in terms of sink or swim…
What I suspect is that without those federal subsidies,
his companies like Starlink and Tesla would fold in two minutes…
and why this distinct double standard, one for the wealthy
and one for the poor, should be continued?

Now if we are actually engaged in the merits of cooperation
that aims to improve/help people, then maybe, maybe,
we might be able to justify this vast federal largesse to
Musk and other corporate types, in terms of helping
people keep their jobs, but that isn’t the end all, be all..
people having jobs, but that is another discussion, for
another time…

So, the question becomes, how do we justify government actions/
private actions in terms of the dictates of evolution?

That is one way, not the only one, but one way we can use
to make decisions and create actions…How does this action
help us benefit others, including the public, a nation,
or a people? Evolution becomes a guide to actions,
and if that actions can be justified by evolution, then
we keep on going, otherwise we must stop…

that is one way we can use evolution to justify ours and any
actions we take…

Kropotkin

1 Like
2

So, let us further into this matter…
How does the GOP/MAGA ‘‘drowning’’ of the federal
government work in light of evolution?

The fact is that evolution is about the large number of people,
not the single ones… and every action we take, must take
into account those people and in terms of evolution…
the question of evolution is simply, what does it take, so
that people survive and procreate? that is the entire point
of evolution, to survive and procreate…
there is not moral/ethical aspect to evolution…
and any comments on morality or ethics in terms of evolution
are simply not related to the actual operations of evolution…

How are we to ensure the survival and the procreation of
people? as for some ideologies that do not fit into this,
are such isms/ideologies as Rugged Individualism…
the great man theory, or survival of the fittest…
do not fit within our interpretation of evolution…
In what sense does the survival of the fittest work in
our current day and age? In light of evolution, what
values or beliefs are actually of benefit to us, as a species
and for our survival and the availability for procreation…
for that is the question for us within evolution…

What does it take for us to survive and be able to procreate?

I do note that even the most wretched of us is able to
procreate… male or female… now the right wing of us,
might say, that the state/society is defined by the best
and greatest among us… and where is that evidence?
Evolution isn’t about the great men/women, but about
the whole of the state/society… and from an evolutionary
standpoint, it is only the society/state that matters…
that there might be exceptional human beings, isn’t relevant
to the idea of evolution…to say, the idea of the state/society
is to create and nurse exceptional human beings is to find clues
that don’t exists within the idea of evolution itself… great human
beings may or may not arise from evolution, but that isn’t the point…
From an evolutionary standpoint, the only thing that matters is
the survival and procreation of the human species…

and the question becomes this, what actions or decisions taken
will help us with our own survival and the ability to procreate?
This is not, NOT an individual question but a collective one…
for evolution is not interested in the one, but in the species
as a whole…and every question about evolution revolves
around us as a whole, not as an individual…

and that is why the state/society is so important…
for that is how we engage in our own success as human beings,
not as individuals, but as a species…Evolution is not about
the one, but the many… as is the state and the society…

I hold that by engaging in individual rights over collective rights,
we harm, damage ourselves in evolutionary ways…
for evolution itself is about the whole, not the individual self…
and that changes everything we think about and do…

Kropotkin

1 Like
3

let us turn to an ism that dominate today, capitalism…
capitalism is about the ability of the whole, the collective
to achieve, in part, their needs and wants… but today,
capitalism is about the individual gaining wealth, a zero-sum
game… and that isn’t about the whole, the society, but
about one gaining wealth over another… but collectively,
evolutionarily, that damages the whole, the collective, the
state and society… today, capitalism is actively harming us,
by harming the individual within that state/society…
by single individuals holding vast wealth, for example,
we know, KNOW, that 500 individuals hold more wealth
than half the entire human population… and by this
concentration of wealth into a very few hands, prevents wealth
from being distributed to the society at large… where half
the entire population of the Earth is not able to meet their needs
or wants because the money needed is in the hands of those
500 people… wealth is best served by being distributed
to the society/state at large, not in the hands of a few individuals…

We can make a statement about this: that which benefits the whole,
the state/society is desirable, that which denies or negates
the whole, be it state or society, is deemed to be damaging,
undesirable… that is the lesson of evolution… the only aspect
to look at is the whole, the species, or the state/society…
if it doesn’t benefit the whole, it has no place in our state/society…

and that is the lesson of evolution… not the few or the wealthy
or the powerful, but for all of us within the state/society…
that is the lesson of evolution…

Kropotkin

1 Like
4

if the lesson to be learned is that our society, state is
about the gaining of wealth, not about any collective goal,
then we cannot, CANNOT begrudge the so called, ‘‘Welfare queen’’
from doing the exact same thing as Musk is doing, which is
the gaining of wealth regardless of the means of gaining that wealth…
What is the priority, the gaining of wealth or how, the ethics of gaining,
of the wealth? Today, we only acknowledge that gaining of wealth,
not how wealth is gained? For if we were actually interested in the
how wealth is gained, ethically, then we would take far more interest
in the subsidies of money given to the likes of Musk… public money
given for the purpose of an individual in gaining wealth… and we
know from our understanding of evolution, that the entire idea of
evolution isn’t about the goals and desires of one person, but
about the survival and procreation of the state/society in the form
of the majority of individuals within that state/society… not the one,
but the many/all is the primary function of evolution…
Indeed, I would suggest in terms of evolution, giving Musk
that money, that 8 million dollars a day, is in fact anti-evolutionary…
for it puts the one above the whole…
for if we actually understood and practiced evolution, we
would end the subsides for businesses and the wealthy,
and concentrate on the whole, all…

Kropotkin

1 Like
5

Surely if we just keep voting harder someday the billionaires of the world will see the light and remove their feet from our collective throats because they’re such an empathetic lot.

I mean, it’s not like they don’t control our entire democratic institutions already including the voter counts, right?

Democracy is real, right?

Democracy isn’t always rigged by the superwealthy, right?

We just got to keep on believing, right?

Democracy is an institution of faith, right?

Democracy will save us someday in the future, right?

Must keep hope and faith alive in the system somehow…

:laughing: :sweat_smile: :rofl: :joy:

:clown_face:

1 Like
6

and as usual, adding nothing to the actual thread…
but hay, no surprise there…

Kropotkin

1 Like
7

I am dedicating this song to you Peter.

Listen to this song and think of me every single time buddy.

Don’t stop believing, hold onto that feeling…

:clown_face:

8

you’re an idiot…

Kropotkin

1 Like
9

I can’t imagine still believing in democracy in 2026. How ignorant that would be.

1 Like
10

@ProfessorX

Well, to be fair Peter is a part of the 65 and older crowd of the TV raised me generation, we cannot be so hard on the old fella.

There is a reason his generation is the most propagandized. That constant child like naivety.

:clown_face:

11

I have noticed this too. I do feel bad for them. In some ways their innocence is even kind of cute. Too bad it also collectively ruined the world.

1 Like
12

@ProfessorX

Exactly, you know where I am coming from.

:clown_face: