Natural selection

[Pitbull]

Was watching a documentary last night about animals having the instint to risk their own lives to save others. They actually had a word for it but I can't remember it now

This got me thinking,

Now Darwin was talking about natural selection, but does this not in a way conflict with that theory? Let me explain, if someone was dumb enough to get stuck in water and can't swim, then by natural selection he would drown right? However someone then jumps in to save said "natural selectee". Only to then drown saving him. Meaning Selectee is alive, none selectee drowned.

Was just wondering if this is covered in Darwin's theory or if he even talked about it.

Not trying to debate this at all, was just curious.

 

[(@) (@) twister]

Was watching a documentary last night about animals having the instint to risk their own lives to save others. They actually had a word for it but I can't remember it now

This got me thinking,

Now Darwin was talking about natural selection, but does this not in a way conflict with that theory? Let me explain, if someone was dumb enough to get stuck in water and can't swim, then by natural selection he would drown right? However someone then jumps in to save said "natural selectee". Only to then drown saving him. Meaning Selectee is alive, none selectee drowned.

Was just wondering if this is covered in Darwin's theory or if he even talked about it.

Not trying to debate this at all, was just curious.

Nah - It just means the guy jumping in to save the other was just as foolish as the first. Bravery does not neccesarily equal intelligence

 

[copacetic]

Natural selection is not a cosmic law that defines the behaviour of an individual animal.

It's hard to explain in a nutshell, and I am no expert, but...

... it's about a genetic lineage within a population, not about any one animal.

You are, I think, making the mistake of viewing natural selection as an active and purposeful process, which it simply is not.

Do you doubt that natural selection takes place?

*edit*

Oh, was the word you were looking for perhaps altruism?

 

[Pitbull]

Natural selection is not a cosmic law that defines the behaviour of an individual animal.

It's hard to explain in a nutshell, and I am no expert, but...

... it's about a genetic lineage within a population, not about any one animal.

You are, I think, making the mistake of viewing natural selection as an active and purposeful process, which it simply is not.

Do you doubt that natural selection takes place?

*edit*

Oh, was the word you were looking for perhaps altruism?

That's it. Sounds right.

That is why I said I don't want to go and debate it against his theory. I saw it last night and it just got me thinking. Will check as I'm sure Darwin would have wrote about it somewhere. Thanx Mate.

 

[Techne]

Yeah, I think you are looking for "altruism". And I think artificial selection is more appropriate to discuss the intents of agents with regards to certain behaviours such as altruism. I don't know, that is just what I think and how I see it .

I would also argue that natural selection does not take place, it is not a process, evolution (or biological change if you want) takes place as it is a process. Natural selection is just the necessary outcome of discernible and often quantifiable causes.

 

[porchrat]

Was watching a documentary last night about animals having the instint to risk their own lives to save others. They actually had a word for it but I can't remember it now

This got me thinking,

Now Darwin was talking about natural selection, but does this not in a way conflict with that theory? Let me explain, if someone was dumb enough to get stuck in water and can't swim, then by natural selection he would drown right? However someone then jumps in to save said "natural selectee". Only to then drown saving him. Meaning Selectee is alive, none selectee drowned.

Was just wondering if this is covered in Darwin's theory or if he even talked about it.

Not trying to debate this at all, was just curious.

Being a social animal that looks out for other members of the species can be a beneficial trait. I think that much is obvious.

 

[stricken]

It is also important to note that characteristics within a population of a species follows a normal distribution, with the "edges" populated by the most severe/rarest mutants (genetically unique) members. It is this distribution that "evolves" through natural selection. Genetic variation is also continuous, and a species is merely a group of organisms with DNA similar above a threshold level... thus.. one could describe the different human races as populations within the human species, on different parts of the normal distribution. If it wasnt for technology, starting with sea faring, you could safetely say that, for example, Europeans and Africans would eventually (+- 10 000 years more reproductive isolation) become seperate species, unable to interbreed.

thats my tea time bleh.

 

[alloytoo]

Was watching a documentary last night about animals having the instint to risk their own lives to save others. They actually had a word for it but I can't remember it now

This got me thinking,

Now Darwin was talking about natural selection, but does this not in a way conflict with that theory? Let me explain, if someone was dumb enough to get stuck in water and can't swim, then by natural selection he would drown right? However someone then jumps in to save said "natural selectee". Only to then drown saving him. Meaning Selectee is alive, none selectee drowned.

Was just wondering if this is covered in Darwin's theory or if he even talked about it.

Not trying to debate this at all, was just curious.

Natural selection works on/filters populations of species, within that population members may indulge in behavior which endangers their individual existance, but which may promote their species existance.

Many parents of all species will go to great lengths to protect their off spring, because even if that behavior endangers them personally, it promotes the survival of their gene pool.

 

[murraybiscuit]

the plover is an interesting example of this.
it would appear to constantly put its life on the line, but it is fully aware of the risks and has developed a defensive strategy as its main path to genetic succession.

 

[alloytoo]

the plover is an interesting example of this.
it would appear to constantly put its life on the line, but it is fully aware of the risks and has developed a defensive strategy as its main path to genetic succession.

"Woman and children first"

Biologically woman and children are more valuable than men (to the continued existance of the species)

 

[Nerfherder]

The saving of lives (or putting another life over your own) is part of the heard mentality. The desire to keep the group strong and not live alone.
This is also a part of natural selection as a strong group means that the species will survive better, so in a way heard mentality is actually part of survival of the fittest.

 

[Pitbull]

O btw guys,

The Documentary is called "Hero Factor" incase some of you find these kind of things interresting.

 

[syntax]

Being a social animal that looks out for other members of the species can be a beneficial trait. I think that much is obvious.

That depends, is it purely just to preserve another "number" that it is beneficial? What other benefits are there?

 

[porchrat]

That depends, is it purely just to preserve another "number" that it is beneficial? What other benefits are there?

Having your numbers preserved while other species' numbers suffer is beneficial. Remember natural selection is about all environmental factors and social interaction between a social species is an environmental factor. If that social interaction means they save members where if social interaction had not been present they would have died then social interaction is actually a beneficial trait.