I find surprising the amount of commonly held misconceptions there are about evolution by natural selection. Popular misconception all too often leads to misinformed discourse. I offer the anecdote of a discussion I once had with a college philosophy teacher who, when teaching the basic principles of biological materialism and Darwinism, asserted that natural selection was an idea founded on a principle he described as ‘survival of the fittest’. Whilst one can make the intellectual leap in using the term ‘fit’ in an archaic context, it ultimately ends up confusing modern people who are simply seeking to gain a grasp on Darwin’s powerful ideas.
Within this one misnomer there exists a library of discrepancies with Darwin’s original phrasing, providing loopholes which tend to usher in unwarranted criticism. The first of which is the assumption that Darwin himself coined the misleading term. Darwin never used ‘survival of the fittest’ to describe the process of evolution by natural selection, as popular culture, fueled by a host of BBC documentaries, would have you imagine. In fact, the rather disgusting little piss-term was first used by one Herbert Spencer in Principles of Biology some half a decade after the publication of On the Origin of Species (1859). When one actually reads Darwin’s original text, it becomes apparent that ‘survival of the fittest’ is not a tautology, but a grave misinterpretation. Let’s examine Darwin’s own words on exactly the same subject (I have highlighted the important sections in bold type):
It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent that survives. It is the one that is the most adaptable to change.
It seems uncontroversial to state that this makes perfectly clear Darwin’s intention to actively dissuade a ‘survival of the fittest’ type of interpretation of his work. He asserts that neither strength nor intelligence are the fundamental characteristics of a species well inclined for survival. Rather, both of these are resulting properties of adaptation. It might seem intuitive to think of an array of characteristics like strength, intelligence, speed and size as crucial to the survival of species and, for many examples, they are. However, when one considers the examples of species such as ants or the crane fly, it becomes apparent that there isn’t a characteristic in the animal kingdom which can’t be outmatched by a member of another species. Put simply, where one species excels others might fail.
Other examples include a hypothetical fight between a lion and a bear. Since the lion has always relied heavily on its speed and upper body strength to bring down antelope, it has never had any biological necessity for a particularly strong skull. In this sense the lion has been completely successful in its evolution, but it soon becomes apparent that it would not necessarily fair well if it was forced into locations anew. Consequently, if a lion were to ever come into contact with a grizzly bear of the forest it would likely have its head caved with a single strike. This is because the lion has adapted its attributes based on its surroundings, rather than simply evolving specific ones. If the individuals of a species cannot be successful in their versatility then they are likely to perish. Perhaps if the lion’s ancestors had been moved to a different part of the world by the continental drifts we might look upon a completely different animal. It might not even exist today. We cannot predict with any degree of certainty though since, being completely absent of consciousness, evolution has no foresight.
This notion of biological adaptation is central to Darwin’s theory. Herbert Spencer’s ‘survival of the fittest’ not only undermines the power of natural selection as a general theory, but also grossly misleads and prevents a wide understanding of the topic. It can tend to encumber people with unfounded and poorly researched criticism. Unless one wishes to read On the Origin of Species in the same sense that they might interpret a metaphor, Darwin could not have been clearer about his meaning. Natural selection is not survival of the fittest, it is survival of those that adapt to their ever changing surroundings.
Filed under: Like Woah... Interesting..., Philosophical Thought, Reasoning, Science, The Mind and Suggestibility by Mark Brewer
No Comments »
ku eloquently states, even the most sophisticated computational systems on Earth possess the actual intelligence of a, “…retarded cockroach.”