has anyone here read darwin's book on the origin of species?if so, does he ever discuss about the possibility of evolution being fundamentally flawed, in that it favors the combination of intelligence and malice?
>>24794009Evolution doesn't favor anything. Nature is impersonal and empty. It's also only flawed in your judgement, and outside your judgement it just is. Self reproducing patterns reproduce themselves or they cease to exist. If patterns that exhibit intelligence and malice tend to reproduce themselves more than those that don't, then the former will outnumber the latter over time, appearing to be favored.
Evolution is 10% science, and 90% empty, philosophically vacuous statements about nature like here >>24794053I read the Selfish Gene recently, and it was some of the most asinine, pig-headed drivel I've ever read.
>>24794053>If patterns that exhibit intelligence and malice tend to reproduce themselves more than those that don'tyou have in fact not answered my question. i asked if this is true or false>Evolution doesn't favor anythinga loaded dice sure as hell doesn't have any preference, but it objectively favors a certain outcome, because its probability is not uniform
>>24794059but imo my fear is scientifically valida rapist who manages to never get caught is technically the best candidate to pass down the genes from
>>24794091If you read the aforementioned book, a rapist is just an inferior, more primitive degree psychopath to an altruist, since the altruist can convince him/herself and others their genes are worth passing along.
>>24794098huh, well that doesn't sound righti mean, the low birth rates we're currently experiencing can prove pretty well against that statement
>>24794105Yes, I think Dawkins' post-hoc rationalization for altruism as an evolved mechanism is nonsensical too. It's tautological even. Not scientific in the slightest.Make no mistake though, the mechanistic gene-centric evolutionary theory vindicates your perspective perfectly.
>>24794009>in that it favors the combination of intelligence and maliceThis sort of thinking usually rises from focusing on the individual Beings depend on systems, and systems require stability to exist. Intelligence and malice are good for passing on individual genes within a short timeframe, but within a longer timeframe they are disruptive to the whole, leading to lower chance of survival, which is why we find destabilizing behaviors undesirable to a degree.
