Natural Selection Doesn't Exist In Civilization Part II

In a real sense of natural selection there is no “justification” for any action in motion with the notion of “compensation” being entirely unknown.

Throughout civilization however in comparison every action is tied into a form of idealism where actions are dictated by an infinite amount of “justifications” with the irony of our institutions calling these civil measures natural selection.

Why isn’t this particular contradiction exposed for what it is?

Such a contradiction only shows how civilizations only exist through idealism and how “idealistic” thinking is contrary to natural life.

Isn’t that what we call our laws and systems of justice backed by moral idealisms? Do we not call them “justified”?

Society only exists because of these so called “justifications” as it forces people to assume and acknowledge such constructs as “real” even though there is no support for any of it.

In order for natural selection to exist there must be no authority with existence being proceeded in absolute freedom where anything goes.

Subjective Authorities create narrow hindrances and forms of isolation that obstructs natural selection.

To answer the post title.

Your right I think, we do have selection now but I think its social selection rather than natural. Unless you consider that society is a product of nature, in which case we have natural selection, its just not so basic anymore.

I think that natural selection exists in nature, and it is effective because the dominant species, humans prevailed. In civiliztaion, especially nowadays we try to deny the laws of nature, we’re fighting against it. Pollution, city life,society are all human constructs to oppose nature. The nazi ideology tried to add natural selection into it’s basis, the so called “social darwinism” which means that the stronger and smarter nation (german) will be ultimately the dominant. This is the transformation of the “survival of the fittest”.
I oppose the statement but we can’t put are heads into the sand. Modern societies tend to help both the below and over average citizens. But in practice, it’s emphasized on helping the handicaped or damaged ones. That is necessary , I don’t doubt it. But, on the other hand, geniuses aren’t allways looked after as they should be. Talented kids usually don’t get the tution to become real scientists or whatever. The society tries to integrate them into the average.I think that the average fears or loves thoose who are ‘superrior’ in a way. Fear in the case when they stand out for something that is against popular belief.
So, I say that by abbandoning the talented and looking after the damaged we deny nature’s law. Eventually , we can do so, but not yet. We must cure, not help them live a miserable life, or find a way to prevent. Only the talented can save them. In this case I say that the ends justify the means.

Socialization isn’t nature. Sociology can attest to this.

In my version of natural selection knowledge and widsom is meaningless as such abstracts are relative but since physicalism is the defining feature of our cosmos I would say that physical brute strength in nature is the deciding factor of survival.

[b]( I would also include the reproduction of cells and organisms in the form of sexual intercourse too. We are afterall dominated by the genes that comprise us.)

( We are ruled by our genes and the effect of that is the necessity of replicating genes through reproduction.)[/b]

Civilized human beings get so hooked on wisdom and knowledge since we live in a information existence but few realize that such things are meaningless abstracts beyond the “observer” in the cosmic order of existence.

Another reason why natural selection doesn’t exist in civilization is that the act of “challenging” is forbidden idealistically.

Amongst nature and the animal kingdom there exists various challenges between individual species in the rites of the will to power.

Challenge is made illegal in civilization through various forms of legalities.

Amongst the array of societal phenomena challenge is so illegal that the institution of crime and punishment remains very near to the activity of challengement.

People will say that voting and political protests are form of challengement but I don’t think they are as they only re-affirm the system of legislation and legalities that they are fighting against.

Voting, political protests, idealistic revolts and various forms of impeachment always shows a form of submission that only re-affirms the existence of whatever they are fighting against.

The rites of challenge do not exist in civilization as they remain lost in a absurd sea of legalities, rules and recommendations.

Definition of challenge:

1: to demand as due or deserved : require
2: to order to halt and prove identity
3: to dispute especially as being unjust, invalid, or outmoded : impugn
4: to question formally the legality or legal qualifications of
5 a: to confront or defy boldly : dare b: to call out to duel or combat c: to invite into competition
6: to arouse or stimulate especially by presenting with difficulties
7: to administer a physiological and especially an immunologic challenge to (an organism or cell)
intransitive verb
1: to make or present a challenge
2: to take legal exception
— chal·leng·er noun

Society or culture cannot eliminate the force of natural selection which is always at work, your thread title sucks, you lose.

I disagree

your basing Natural selection on life. this is an incomplete understanding of Nature. or the Universe

( It is always those who can’t think for themselves that constantly resort in posting the rubbish of others.) [-X

Indulge me.

Thanks for the suggestion. :slight_smile:

( That is the second time this week that I have heard this person’s name mentioned.)