He never used the phrase “survival of the fittest”. That was a shorthand for people who knew how to read, but the phrase originated with Herbert Spenser.
The fault lies with the people who do not take the trouble to find out for themselves.
They aren’t saying that he invented the phrase but they seem to be saying that he used it.
Do you at least agree that whoever came up with that particular notion of “fitness”, as well as every single person who embraced it, did some harm by confusing it with the usual notion of “fitness”?
If you want to continue the discussion, you should consider refraining from doing what you’re doing in the above two quotes.
No. You cannot legislate for idiots.
The word usage is perfectly reasonable. And the word never meat “physicall fit” until the 20thC. You can’t expect Darwin to have predicted a change in the meaning of the world.
Have you ever been kind to people in your life? Always only communist? Anyone who disagrees with you is against you? Always only orders and obedience like in the communism!
Written by a communist.
[b]In the Darwinistic sense, “fit” or “fitness” describes the degree of adaptation to the environment (i.e. adaptive specialization), or the ability to reproduce despite low specialization. This means that not that species survives which defies everything and displaces other species, but the one which either adapts to the environment or manages to reproduce continuously despite adverse environmental conditions.
Darwin had recoined the 18th century idea of development through national economic tendencies, which he took from his teacher Malthus and projected into the highest animal kingdom.[/b]
Facts. Period. Facts are not for communists though, which can be seen in this forum.
The human of the future shall be the artificial human. The humans have always tried to make themself different, somehow „new“. But this time it is a serious matter. Our consciousness shall have to learn to understand itself as the consciousness of a machine, as a made and yet in its factual being uninterruptible, self-contained Dasein.
The human of the future shall be the artificial human. The humans have always tried to make themself different, somehow „new“. But this time it is a serious matter. Our consciousness shall have to learn to understand itself as the consciousness of a machine, as a made and yet in its factual being uninterruptible, self-contained Dasein.
Microcomputers (nanobots) the size of a cell are supposed to improve our brain function (probably even when we don’t want them to!) This is to explore the brain, scan synapse by synapse, transmitter by transmitter, and be able to copy a brain.
Virtual spaces are created with such microcomputers. Billions of nanobots will be sent into our brains as artificial neurons, attaching themselves to every single nerve cord coming from our sensory organs.
“When we want to experience real reality, the nanobots hold still. For the virtual reality experience, they cut off the supply of real stimuli and put artificial signals in their place.” - Ray Kurzweil.
"By “fittest” Darwin meant “better adapted for the immediate, local environment”, not the common modern meaning of “in the best physical shape” …" JUST WHAT I SAID IN MY LAST POST (and you illiterate communist could not read it):
"By “fittest” Darwin meant “better adapted for the immediate, local environment”, not the common modern meaning of “in the best physical shape” …" JUST WHAT I SAID IN MY LAST POST (and you illiterate communist could not read it):
So again, Scalped “Sculptor”, go away, you illiterate and unfriendly communist. And don’t start with your insults again, because that’s the only thing you can.
As you have proven here with your unqualified remarks, you have no idea at all about Darwin and Darwinism. If you have read the name “Darwin”, it does not mean that you have “studied Darwin”.
And trolling includes lying. What Sculptor says has nothing to do with Darwin, but everything to do with him. He wants attention, and that makes him a troll. Being a stupid troll forces him to lie.
The later steals from the earlier, the better, the teacher, the master.
Freud stole from Schopenhauer and Nietzsche (as Newton from Leibniz, Marx from Hegel and Einstein from Hilbert), and Schopenhauer already anticipated Darwinism. He was the “better Darwin”.
But Schopenhauer drew pessimistic conclusions from his philosophy, left the occidental “church of reason” and became the first European Buddhist.
The line led from Schopenhauer, who preceded Darwin, over Nietzsche to Freud; so Nietzsche and thus also Freud were influenced by Darwin. Nietzsche and thus also Freud were already forced by the zeitgeist (Hegel) into the optimistic direction.
Schopenhauer was right when he stated that consciousness is bodily affective determined. Yet the opposite is also true. Consciousness determines the body affectively.
Darwin, in turn, started from Malthus, and Malthus was an economist. But what you call “Freudian economics” actually goes back to Schopenhauer. From Schopenhauer’s “will” Freud made “drive” to cover what he had stolen. It is not much different with the “economy” behind it.
Although Malthus was part of Darwin’s reference I do not think it makes sense to imply that Natural Selection NS started from Malthus.
Darwin’s thinking is part of a long tradition of evolutionary thinking that can name sources as diverse as Aristotle, Lamarck, the French philosphes of the enlightnement, and even his own relative Erasmus Darwin. His materialist basis relies from Lyell’s Principles of Geology, and the proposal of uniformitarianism.
Clues to Darwin being most highly influnced by Lamarck is evident, as it is clear that Darwin accepted his theory of acquired inheritance and included in in the 1859 edition of Origin of Species as part of the explanation along with NS (with Wallace) for evolution.
I can’t remember when Darwin removed references to Lamarckian evolution, but he spent many hours with his cousin Francis Galton, mutilating generations of rabbits to see if they could induce changes through this process. They failed.
He even had a tentative “gene” theory in which gemules were supposedly released inside the body to enact the appropriate changes in the germ cells for the next generation.
Malthus provided an idea that populations crash when they are too big. Which forms a tiny, but necessary, part of the theory of NS which was mainly based on observations of domestic breeders of farm animals and pets.
Darwin was NOT a scholar of any philosophy, nor did he have any interest in Shop or any other outside the direct interests of geological sciences.
