1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Is Suicide consistent with Theory of Natural Selection / Survival of the Fittest?

Discussion in 'Opinions, Beliefs, & Points of View' started by BOLIAO, Aug 29, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

    BOLIAO Guest

    Are people like us meant to self eliminate so that the survival of the fittest is ensured in the human race?

    and I recently read the 'Law of Attraction' theory and feels kinda true for me. I kinda attract situations that I really would go all out to avoid and then it happens. Maybe some of u can check it out in the net.
    Last edited: Aug 29, 2007
  2. Azul

    Azul Well-Known Member

    Could be, but that doesn't mean we don't have the right to protest against it. We are in possession of a free will so we don't have to follow any natural or social "laws", each one of us is capable of constructing his own values and laws, and if you believe you have a right to live it is up to you not to let anything outside you convince you otherwise.
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 29, 2007
  3. Ignored

    Ignored Staff Alumni

  4. Anime-Zodiac

    Anime-Zodiac Well-Known Member

    No, I don't think Suicide is consistent with the theory of natural Selection. And besides if it was then like Azul said, we have a free will of our own and also we are not bound or governed by this law.
  5. Erebos

    Erebos Well-Known Member

    Nah. A "predisposition to kill yourself" isn't (easily) traced to your genes, which is required for natural selection to act upon. I'd say the predisposition stems largely from cultural, societal and environmental factors, not innate genetic ones.
  6. Mew

    Mew Active Member

    Indirectly maybe? There may be no direct link to a genetic predisposition to kill ourselves, but say some illness could cut down on your sex drive or whatever and prevent you from passing on your genes to another generation. Could be our desire to avoid pain that manifests itself as a desire to kill ourselves when pain exceeds our tolerance. Who knows, maybe some of our disorders and whatnot are warped versions of what were/are healthy survival instincts, maybe healthy instincts applied to the wrong situations...?

    As has been said though, even if it were consistent, doesn't mean we should stick to it. I certainly have better reasons to end it than natural selection :p
  7. TwilightHours

    TwilightHours Active Member

    Well, there isn't some master list of what is and is not included, but in the case of suicide you have two sides.

    1. Yes: Anything that kills you is removing you from the genepool.

    2. No: It may kill you, but suicide is not really a genetics thing.

    The exception to 2, however, may be the rare to impossible case of a genetic mutation that removes the baser instinct to survive.
  8. Yeah, probably. If you're not strong enough to realize suicide is an idiotic thing to do, then you're probably not smart enough to survive the real world.
  9. Azul

    Azul Well-Known Member

    So Vincent Van Gogh, Primo Levi, Virginia Woolf, Sylvia Plath, Hunter S Thompson, Osamu Dazai, Yukio Mishima, Guy Debord, Gilles Deleuze, Charles Baudelaire (attempt) were not smart or strong enough, not "fit" enough for the social darwinists?
  10. Azul

    Azul Well-Known Member

    To me and millions of others these people were very valuable human beings. See what I mean?
  11. ~CazzaAngel~

    ~CazzaAngel~ Staff Alumni

    I agree. :thumbup:
  12. Ziggy

    Ziggy Antiquitie's Friend

    Survival of the fittest? Then why after thousands of years is the world full of idiots? What's 'fit' about them all?
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 30, 2007
  13. SueEisman

    SueEisman Member

    Is there anywhere the right wingers don't post?

  14. hammockmonkey

    hammockmonkey Well-Known Member

    only if they did not have any off spring.

    Joking statement.
  15. Hae-Gi

    Hae-Gi Banned Member

    I really don't care. I have no respect for nature and its cruelty. I am above nature. I won't pass my genes on, but that's not merely due to my absolute unwill to have annoying children; it is also that I have no wish to take part in nature's worthless ways. Taking part in it by, for instance, leaving samples for sperm banks would be to, indirectly, accept it, and I would never accept its cruelty and stupidity. Furthermore, it is meaningless, anyway, since all chains of life, eventually will end.
  16. ybt

    ybt Guest

    I don't think Darwin has anything to do with suicide. I believe he has been overhyped by the intellectual media. The problem with suicide and Darwinism lies in the fact that whatever power there may be, even if you believe in no power, gave us free will.
  17. you guys better understand the law of natural selection first then post those pathetic neive posts, nature is fair to everyone, it eliminates the "bad things" and keeps the "good things", if someone is born with a bad heritable disease, then naturally, the opposite sex wouldn't be attracted to them because then the offspring would carry the disease and life wouldn't go on healthily and fairly...how is it different than when a person with a bad personality or character who maybe shy or lacks self-esteem or have a hell of a load of problems?? he would pass that to his children either genetically or in an environmental and social fashion, meaning more pain and suffering to the offspring and to the world, someone like me wishes to die because nature is forcing me to, so that brighter people can pass on their characteristics to their offspring and make life a better place, be open minded, we are the "bad things" if we were the good things we'd wish for the "bad things" to disappear, this is nothing but logic.....
  18. Natural selection is not a law it is a theory.

    "Natural selection is the process by which favorable traits that are heritable become more common in successive generations of a population of reproducing organisms, and unfavorable traits that are heritable become less common."

    I would submit that mental illness does contribute to natural selection. However, social conditions should be considered also, for example it is said in the media that there are more pressures on young people today than there were 10 years ago and this mayincrease the incidence of suicide that is not genetically linked.

    PS I dropped out of Biology at university in second year so I'm no expert!
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 31, 2007
  19. Hae-Gi

    Hae-Gi Banned Member

    In response to engravefeelthevoid:

    Nature is far from fair to everyone. That is such bullshit. It most certainly does NOT, exclusively, eliminate bad things, and keep good things. Why does rape exist? Because ruthlessness is preferred over kindness in nature. How many humans have been created, due to rape? In the end, we are all the cause of rape, due to the horrific ways of nature. Rape is a purely evil act, but nature likes it, because it lets ruthless, cold and power hungry individuals to have the possibility to continue developing. Same goes for ruthless individuals, otherwise, like warmongers.

    There is no kindness in nature. There is only logic.
  20. TwilightHours

    TwilightHours Active Member

    Good and bad as morals are purely subjective. In Darwinism, if it helps you procreate, it is good; if it is detrimental to reproduction, it is bad.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.