View Single Post
Old 02-10-11, 05:01 PM   #34
tater
Navy Seal
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: New Mexico, USA
Posts: 9,023
Downloads: 8
Uploads: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen View Post
No, that's not exactly true. Natural selection rewards overall fitness to survive. That is, the most adept in their environment are the ones that pass on their genes to the next generation. All, even those least able to thrive are physically capable of reproduction, epecially in the male sex, where the physical difficulties of gestation are not endured.
Fitness in evolutionary biology is reproductive fitness. "Survival" is meaningless evolutionarily if you do not reproduce to pass on anything.

So while some non-reproductive trait might increase the number of offspring you produce (or sire), the fact that more offspring is created is what matters and is "fitness" in population genetics.

You can be a novel "superman" and it makes no difference if you do not pass the genes on.

More genes passed on is more "fit."

Natural selection "rewards" nothing at all. It just is.
__________________
"Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one." — Thomas Paine
tater is offline   Reply With Quote