Darwin's "Survival of the fittest," applies to present day society.
Living in a society in which people are engraved in history, having money to do as they please. Money is what we've created in order to survive. Everyone fights to have the most money possible, a "weapon of survival." Those who are rich exemplify the fittist. Now on the other hand you can visit a major city, realizing people live in society, yet some eat garbage and lay in boxes. Money being the tool of survival also shows how, 3rd world countries suffer and die through starvation. Is this not survival of the fittest, rather it be physical it is now today applied mentaly.
Yes
Side Score: 4
|
 |
No
Side Score: 5
|
|
|
|
|
Please read thisThe phrase "survival of the fittest" is not generally used by modern biologists as the term does not accurately convey the meaning of natural selection, the term biologists use and prefer. Natural selection refers to differential reproduction as a function of traits that have a genetic basis. "Survival of the fittest" is inaccurate for two important reasons. First, survival is merely a normal prerequisite to reproduction. Second, fitness has specialized meaning in biology different from how the word is used in popular culture. In population genetics, fitness refers to differential reproduction. "Fitness" does not refer to whether an individual is "physically fit" – bigger, faster or stronger – or "better" in any subjective sense. It refers to a difference in reproductive rate from one generation to the next. Side: No
Yes i know it's called "natural selection," but when referred as "survival of the fittest." It states a summary and less reproduction. The environmental impact and how we adapt to it. Does this environment created today impact adaptation? in the same way it did more so brutally when humanity appeared. Side: Yes
I've had a couple of drinks so forgive me if I've got your debate arse about face but I disagree that having money proves Darwin's theory. From what I have seen of the world money does not make one more capable of survival, the poor are the tougher and happier if not the healthiest, also the poor seem to breed more than the rich. The main thing I have learnt from my travels is that people with nothing expect nothing but people with money are always looking for how they can improve their fortune. End of the day when the world descends into anarchy and money becomes worthless the rich will be poor and the poor will be rich Side: No
I have grew up poor, i agree that it will make you EMOTIANALY strong. You can't ignore the fact that we use money in these ways; homes, food, transportation (needed to get to work for money,) Education (needed for higher probability of money.) and etc. If all of these things are obtained through money, does that not mean we survive through money...? Happieness and emotional strength is not created from money, but at the same time happieness and emotional strength does not make us survive. Scenario 1: Kidnapped people get sent to an uncivilized jungle that is deserted. They survive through adapting to the environment. They will find shelter, food... and a water source. Those who can't consistently do this die off, those who can survive. Scenario 2: An uncivilized society of humans were discovered in a harsh environment. Once transported to the society we know, they perceive an environment and then adapt. They know to survive, you must have shelter, water, and food. This is obtained through money. Let's say they can't adapt to such complexities in a society, and they die. Does this not exemplify they couldn't survive, due to the fact of money? If you think scenario 2, is correct. Than you must agree that money itself is evidence that survival of the fittest is being applied. Just because the environment we created is something we're use to. Doesn't mean that we don't struggle in an environment and coincide with others and fight survival each day. If you were somehow (hypothetically speaking) restricted of any money in some way and somehow. Yet you had to survive in this society. It is likely you would die or get sick than die, money is in fact proof survival of the fittest. Side: Yes
|
