Chimps \'r\' not us: the role of gene enhancers (Introduction)

by David Turell , Saturday, February 03, 2018, 19:43 (2486 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: I'm discussing survivability at a different thought level than yours. It is a minor evolutionary driving force, but a daily individual human concern.

dhw: It is and always was a daily individual concern for all species, and it is the absolute priority for all. […]

DAVID: You are still discussing survival at the individual level, and I'm not. I'm knocking down 'survival of the fitest' as a concept supporting Darwin. It doesn't, but sounds good on the surface. What survives lives to evolve, but what survives doesn't tell us what drives evolution. See the difference?

dhw: We are not talking about the tautology of survival of the fittest, but yes, we are talking about what drives evolution. According to you, survivability is a “minor evolutionary issue” and “of no issue to the Homo branch”. And yet you keep telling us that prior to 30,000 years ago, every development both human and non-human was motivated solely by the quest for survival, and you even ask why sapiens hung around for 270,000 years without advancing beyond survivability. Knocking Darwin does not get you out of the logical hole you have dug for yourself. If survival was the only motive behind evolutionary advances until 30,000 years ago, survivability (which includes improving chances of survival) could not have been a minor issue or a non-issue.

You still don't see that you are talking about individual survival. When sapiens arrived they had the total capacity to easily survive and create civilization. I questioned the delay for using their capacity as an answer to your 'push' theory about big brains, nothing more. It took 270,000 years for sapiens to discover their real capbilities. That is simply the history of our species. My point still remains. We evolved way beyond any needs for simple survivability, which makes us special. As for my thoughts about Darwin: he was an unusual person for his time. He forced us to develop deep thoughts about evolutionary mechanisms, even though his proposed mechanisms were/are totally wrong. Not his fault.