Human evolution has ended

One day, it suddenly struck me: Human evolution, in the Darwinian sense, has ended.

Before you start arguing with me, note the qualifier: “Darwinian.” I am sure we humans will continue to get smarter, healthier and live longer lives. But we will not get smarter, healthier and live longer lives because we are “evolving” in the Darwinian sense.

Good riddance too. “Evolution” evokes positive connotations in most people, but if you understand what it is, you will realise that it is nasty business. “Survival of the fittest” implies the demise of the unfit. It means that you have an advantage over your fellow beings solely because of a gene that you were born with. That gene ensures that you and your progeny surive through tough times and get more mates than others, while your fellows who don’t have the gene suffer and die without leaving any progeny. The advantage that your gene gives you in fact makes things worse for your competitors, who are already facing a pretty hostile environment.

So why do I claim that human evolution has ended? For three reasons.

Firstly, because of division of labour and trade. Human society is specialised to an unprecedented extent, which means that a) Even the “winners” in human society are dependent on the “losers” and b) Different people do well in human societies at different times and in differing conditions. This means that even if we assume that specific genes give advantages to people in specific professions, there is no single gene that can possibly dominate and wipe out the others.

Second, because human beings create surplus wealth. In a capitalist society, your success is defined by how much wealth you create in excess of how much you really need. This is wealth ensures that even the most unfit, the people with (probably) defective genes, who, in any other species would have lost the battle for survival, can live and breed.

Third, because humans have intelligence. Also, they can communicate with each other. This ensures that the weaker get the benefit of the experiences of the strong. It means that “survival of the fittest”, which in other species would have meant that weaker have to die, in humans it simply means that they have to fail, learn from their mistakes and start over.

All of those who oppose capitalism, and many who support it, think that capitalism implies Darwinian survival of the fittest. Many of those who support capitalism do so on the ground that because “survival of the fittest” is what occurs in nature, capitalism is the right approach to take because “Natural” is good. In any case, both groups are wrong. Capitalism has nothing to do with Darwinian evolution. In fact, it is one of the aspects of capitalism – free trade – that rescues mankind from the horrors of evoution. That and the human mind. The human mind is the evolution that ends evolution.

6 thoughts on “Human evolution has ended”

  1. In a related note, I believe that I am of the evolved, superior elite.

    I think it is only natural for men (gender neutral, and just a tag) will grow fatter, and curvier and fleshier in the ages and days to come.

    It is only natural. With increased incomes and better technology, there is more time for leisure. And more food. And that will only put the extra pounds in you.

    Fatter is good. fatter is evolved. Fatter is the future.

    I even posted an entry about this. Here

  3. Swami, Darwinian evolution has basically to do with 1) Random and heritable variation in genes and 2) Survival of the fittest of these genes.
    Everything else is just quibbles over details, i.e. whethter the variations are big or small, how speciation occurs, what exactly “fitness” is, etc.

  4. I thought Darwin’s theory basically had to do with Natural Selection and Sexual selection. In the first type of selection – nature plays the dominant role in deciding the fittest of the speicies – and which in turn are capable of producing more of their offsprings, thereby changing the facade of the population.

    In the second type of selection, either male or the female gender, prefers certain type of characteristics of the other gender – thereby that peculiar attraction leads to more offsprings, which again changes the outlook of the population.

    And finally Darwin didn’t know about ‘genes’ or how the variation passed on from parents to the offspring – although he had his own theories on this matter. In many cases (such as beaks of birds; spots / stripes on animals) he preffered to skip the matter and often blamed improper geological records.

  5. Teshu,
    By “Darwinian” most people don’t mean the exact theory propounded by Darwin, but the theory in its current stage of knowledge. People have expanded on the details, learnt about genes etc. but the basic idea by Darwin was correct. So it is rightly called Darwinian.

    You can call it Natural Selection or Sexual Selection if you like, but you can’t get around the fact that the reason why selection works is that the members of the species who have an advantage over others die at a lower rate and breed at a higher rate than the others. Unless that can happen among humans, darwinian selection is effectively dead.

  6. Perhaps, the Evolution page in TheScian Science Wiki might be of interest.

    If you haven’t read Richard Dawkins’, “The Blind Watchmaker”, do it now. For more intense reading, try “The Extended Phenotype”.

Comments are closed.