Natural selection

[hurts2b-old]

I feel like my suicide will be "natural selection" in a way since I am unfit for human society and life in general. But many would say natural selection doesn't apply to humanity.

Thoughts?

 

[Lov3]

99.9% of all species that have ever existed are extinct and we will all die, even the universe will die, so I wouldn't be thinking about natural selection.

Passing genes on? But our descendants will die too, and we wouldn't be alive to see it either.

So worry more about your well-being than about society, because society only drains us and then abandons us.

 

[Liwujin]

I think natural selection is still going on but instead it is society itself perfoming it. Technology, specially healthcare, has been keeping people alive that definitely wouldn't have made it in a more "natural" world—not saying you are one of them of course, I don't know.

 

[Forever Sleep]

It's an interesting concept. I find it intriguing to follow the train of thought through.

I've read before the irony that- people most concerned about the environment may opt not to have children. But then- that may mean that fewer children are therefore born and raised by people who care about the planet- so more may be likely to bring about human extinction and many other species with us. That said, I'm not convinced that a few environmentalists can or will save us now- regardless.

But- I've had the same thought as you. I don't think my genes do well in this world. I'm glad I haven't passed them on- because I think any child of mine would also suffer here.

Perhaps that is survival of the fittest at work- weeding out the weaklings. That said- I'm glad I don't have the traits of people who do well in this world. I think many of our leaders have narcissistic/ sociopathic/ psychopathic traits. Who wants to live in a world populated and run by them? I suppose they do! Which is fine by me- leave them be to destroy one another.

I also agree that- natural selection doesn't really apply to the human world. If a child is born with crippling disability- physical or mental- it often has money thrown at it to try to compensate, depending on how wealthy its parents were and where it lives.

Plenty of genetic vulnerabilities are passed on because we find the idea of eugenics fascist. And because people seem to think they have the right to reproduce- no matter what. I wonder how many even think that much about the genes they are passing on.

Like you say though- I suppose 'natural' selection has been replaced by other forms of selection.

 

[Hvergelmir]

...many would say natural selection doesn't apply to humanity.

Thoughts?

Of course it does. The only confusion is in the definition of "natural".
Different environments presents different selection pressures. Modern society makes your Facebook posts more important than your ability to fend off predators, but there's still selection. Some procreates more than others. Some survive better than others.

Likewise, an ant colony presents very different selection pressures, compared to the less ordered environment of more solitary insects. We can choose to call human cities and their selection pressures unnatural, but it's still fundamentally the same thing, about which genes spread more.

I feel like my suicide will be "natural selection"

Natural selection is the big pattern. Genetic lines that die more than they reproduce, go extinct.
It doesn't apply to any one individual.

You can have amazing genes, and still die young, or without children.

 

[Sphinxi]

Person who reads the Genealogy of Morals, sees that they are the untermensch, and commits suicide. Lol

 

[LaetumCat]

I think it definitely applies to society, especially since the current society is very capitalistic.
Basically, those, who are "weak" (either by being born with illnesses, or some accident happened, really in any way), don't contribute to the society, therefore, the society dislikes them, thinks of them as a pest, etc. If you're not "useful" to the society in one way or another, most people don't care about you - just think of addicts living on the streets. Sure, they may have been important when they weren't addicts and contributed to the society, but now? Nobody cares, and most people are disgusted by them, solely because they cannot take care of themselves in a way that wouldn't be seen as animalistic, basically, homeless people don't hold up to their standards, and so they're "naturally" left behind. It's sad really.

 

[13eyond 13irthday]

Depends. Did you have children? Did you support close relatives enough that they did have children? In that case, your genes may be passed on. If not, then you may be selecting against yourself. Selection absolutely applies to humans, however. It's part of how we got smarter than other animals; competition between one another in complex social games, resulting in smarter humans having more children.

Suicide is something that I think does result in lower fitness for most individuals, but it is possible that it is an evolutionary advantage. There are people like myself, who were initially beneficial for society, and for improving the wellbeing of others in my close family. Then, after a certain point, my usefulness ended. Having a gene that induces suicidal thoughts in a person like me would thus be beneficial, a fitness advantage; because I would further increase the number of those with that suicidal gene.

I think it would be extremely unethical for me to have children, because my children (especially my sons) would probably suffer tremendously, and I know that from the start. So I probably won't ever have children, and thus will make the world a better place.

 

[PanaxMan]

I feel like my suicide will be "natural selection" in a way since I am unfit for human society and life in general. But many would say natural selection doesn't apply to humanity.

Thoughts?

Mines gonna be the same after all kids in africa die from it everyday

 

[gonnaAbstract]

I've felt like this for a long time.

 

[Pluto]

 

[hurts2b-old]

Person who reads the Genealogy of Morals, sees that they are the untermensch, and commits suicide. Lol

What?

 

[jw_sisyphus97]

Genealogy of Morals - haven't heard that one in a while. Perhaps I'll refresh my Nietzsche reading and see what he would have thought of the cruelty of natural world.

 

[franos666]

Of course natural selection applies to humanity because we are still animals

 

[LovesickLoser]

Natural selection absolutely does apply to humans. Look at the hypergamy epidemic and see how skewed women's dating preferences are in the modern day with the dozens of studies done surrounding how the majority of young men are experiencing historical levels of terminal singlehood and not being able to start families. Women are also affected by this as well in a sense, because instead of trying to secure a man who's willing to keep them they choose to sleep around with more attractive men who have more desirable options once they've already gotten sex from them. The people who actually get the chance to start a family are being "naturally" selected, and the ones who don't get to (or in the case of most women choose not to) are being taken out of the gene pool; that is natural selection at it's core.

Not every instance of suicide is natural selection, but many (including myself) are choosing to kill themselves because of their inability to date or find love, and that's basically just an extension of this "natural selection" crisis.

 

[CarbonBased]

I feel like my suicide will be "natural selection" in a way since I am unfit for human society and life in general. But many would say natural selection doesn't apply to humanity.

Thoughts?

I would say that so long as humans continue to reproduce through natural means, and either choose their own partners or have a non-zero chance of losing the ability to reproduce (e.g. passing before reaching reproductive age or becoming infertile), natural selection still applies.
People who say that natural selection doesn't apply to humans probably assume that natural selection is just about survival, and since for many people survival (at least for a while) is next to guaranteed, natural selection can no longer apply. However, this is an overly simplistic view of natural selection. Even if people were unable to die and always remained fertile, natural selection wouldn't disappear. For example, this would do nothing to social and sexual selection. Having a higher social status (e.g. having many friends, being respected for your role in a society, being wealthy, etc.) or being better at attracting a mate (e.g. looking healthy or fit, being charismatic, knowing how to dress, etc.) can meaningfully influence your reproductive success, making you subject to natural selection. Furthermore, as other people have pointed out, natural selection doesn't target individuals as much as it targets individual genes. Your siblings (and other relatives to a lesser extent) share some of your genes. If you are better at helping your family prosper, you are also better at indirectly spreading your own genes without ever having to reproduce yourself. This ability will also be selected for by natural selection.
Individual acts, such as committing suicide are not in themselves examples of "natural selection". Whether you go through with it or not, you (or rather the species you belong to) will still be subject to natural selection to the same degree.

P.S. I don't have formal education in the relevant field, didn't use AI, and didn't fact-check myself, so take what I say with a grain of salt.