Human evolution

[DrPizza]

1. So that this thread doesn't turn into a debate about evolution, this thread assumes evolution is the correct model for the development of species. If you want to debate evolution, start your own thread.

What do you foresee as the future of mankind, in terms of evolution of our species (and assuming we don't annihilate ourselves in nuclear war or something)

I keep thinking about it and have been considering that we could possibly evolve into 2 species, with intelligence being a distinguishing characteristic. "Smart" people tend to marry other "smart" people. While this isn't a rule, the probability of a smart person marrying another smart person is much much higher than random chance. Thus, mates are chosen for this trait.

And, unintelligent persons typically marry other unintelligent persons. As intelligence is partially hereditary, their offspring will tend to be less intelligent as well.

Thus, gradually over 1000's of years, we may end up with 2 groups that vary significantly in intelligence. Survival of the fittest: the intelligent people rely on their intelligence to make their way in the world. The non-intelligent people rely on other skills to make their way in the world.

What bothers me is that there is continuous intermingling between the two groups, but I suppose the same has happened at other times with divergent evolution.

And, a problem: the "intelligent" group typically waits until later in life to have children, and generally has fewer offspring than the less intelligent group. Would the intelligent group get overrun by the unintelligent group?

 

[Electric Amish]

Kinda like H.G. Wells, huh?

 

[AbsolutDealage]

Someone just read The Time Machine....

Edit: Bah... sniped it from me there amish

 

[lozina]

I see future humans relying so much on machinery that their arms and legs atrophe into slender fragile appendeges, our digestive system will be replaced with bio-mechanics to feed a special nutrient rich forumal directly into our bloodstream eliminating need to eat, our brains will be linked to whatever machine or robot we need to use to allow our brains to operate them through electrical signals directly.

Oh and religious fanatics will modify the human genes to avoid producing genetils so all children will be engineered in a lab and no one can have sex for pleasure.... dang

 

[Fausto]

Originally posted by: Electric Amish
Kinda like H.G. Wells, huh?

hehe....someone's gonna dig you up one day and say "Hey....this appears to be a proto-Morlock. How fascinating."

 

[bandana163]

After 1000 years, humanity's stupidity will probably be immense, assuming humanity will still exist. Children are getting more and more unintelligent with every generation because of their more and more unintelligent parents. At least this is what I see observing today's youth and the other generations.

 

[Electric Amish]

Originally posted by: Fausto1

Originally posted by: Electric Amish
Kinda like H.G. Wells, huh?

hehe....someone's gonna dig you up one day and say "Hey....this appears to be a proto-Morlock. How fascinating."

Hey! You callin' me stupid?

 

[Fausto]

Originally posted by: Electric Amish

Originally posted by: Fausto1

Originally posted by: Electric Amish
Kinda like H.G. Wells, huh?

hehe....someone's gonna dig you up one day and say "Hey....this appears to be a proto-Morlock. How fascinating."

Hey! You callin' me stupid?

Yes, but I tried to use large words so you wouldn't notice.

 

[opticalmace]

There are quite a few problems with the questions you pose.

I don't particularly feel like making an essay of it, but basically:

Many people procreate before marriage.
Intelligence varies widely between generations.
We all deep down wish to guarantee the success of the species. "Smart" people will screw "dumb" people freely.
What's to guage intelligence?

And come on. Do you really think there will be 2 groups of mankind, the intelligent and the practical, in thousands of years?
There are so many things wrong with that hypothesis right there that I'm going to assume you have not studied evolution in any way at all.
Perhaps if there were a continent of 200-level IQ beings, and everyone else in the world could barely move that could be true. But sheesh.

 

[ClueLis]

I think you're assuming too much separation. I honestly don't think that intelligence is enough of a consistent attribute for that to occur (i.e. smart people don't always have smart kids). My personal guess is that intelligence relies on a combination of upbringing and many genetic factors.

Also, if there was a single "smartness" gene, we would be genetically engineering almost all children to have it within a couple hundred years, IMO.

 

[PatboyX]

there was a philip k. dick story where people evolved uber-fast. i think all their teeth fell out, they grew huge brains and their arms and legs grew short and weak. they were like big-brained, toothless rodents....
of course, they eventually turned into beings of pure energy.
or wait, maybe im getting confused...i think the rodents on the ship become super-intelligent and saved the day or something.
eh, i cant remember...he wrote too much.

 

[hjo3]

I don't think intelligence is as hereditary as you think it is. I think it primarily comes from how one is raised.

 

[GRIFFIN1]

The smart people are doomed. The idiots breed so fast that they will eventually take over. When there are no more smart people to work and pay taxes to feed and house the stupid people, then it will all come crashing down.

 

[RossGr]

Intellegence may be a NEGITIVE survival factor. Intellegent peoply tend to have fewer children, the ignorant masses proliferate like rabbits. Seems that in the long run, with this trend, intellegence will breed itself out of existance.

 

[DrPizza]

That's what "Time Machine" is about? Haven't read it, sorry..

And, no, I don't think I'm assuming too much separation. How did male peacocks come to have such plummage?
Certainly, at one time they had plummage only half the length. Females select for larger plummage. While there isn't a huge difference between the largest and smallest, over time, the largest is getting larger.

From what species did peacocks evolve, and perhaps, did other species evolve from the original species as well, one that selected for some other trait?

I'll agree that intelligence isn't 100% hereditary. I'll submit to that point, BUT, it is partially hereditary.


And, to RossGR...

Intellegence may be a NEGITIVE survival factor. Intellegent peoply tend to have fewer children, the ignorant masses proliferate like rabbits. Seems that in the long run, with this trend, intellegence will breed itself out of existance.

That's the concept that got me originally started on this topic... I was hoping there would be some hope that our species would evolve to a higher level (in terms of intelligence) over the next 50 thousand years or so. I think the only way it would happen though, for the reason you just stated, is if there was divergent evolution, with 2 groups eventually breaking away from each other (the break away would take thousands of years... not just a couple of generations) Otherwise, we'll probably level out at some maximum level of intelligence.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I think we are at the point where human evolution is ending. That is not the same as development.

Evolution is a natural process. What I think will happen is massive genetic manipulation coupled with the incorporation of synthentic components to aid memory, physical performance etc. Tomorrows "human" won't be. Those who do not conform to this process of "improvement" will be a disadvantage, so much so that they will probably not be allowed to breed. THey will die out, except perhaps for a few vestigal groups placed on "preserves" I would expect to see this in a thousand years or less. In ten thousand years, the decendents of humanity will be completely beyond our comprehension. By comparison, we will seem like rodents, and not very smart ones.

 

[SagaLore]

Don't worry, the Democrats will make sure this will never happen. Everyone will be equally poor and dumb. :beer:

 

[xizor]

macro-evolution has ceased to exist (if you believe it ever did), there is no such thing as natural survival of the fittest today. humans have too much control over nature for it to affect us. With gene therapy and medicine, there is no weak and strong, we will be able to plan out our evolution. In reality governments hold the evolution of humanity, they will choose who is given medicine, information, food. IMO the future is more likely to look like Gattaca than the Time Machine.

 

[SagaLore]

Originally posted by: hjo3
I don't think intelligence is as hereditary as you think it is. I think it primarily comes from how one is raised.

Of course intelligence is hereditary. What do you think seperates us from monkeys and pigs?

 

[bandana163]

Survival of the fittest would hinder the "Rule all of 'em stupid inane non-thinking masses" politics.

 

[Kyteland]

There is no proof that intelligence is a survival trait.

 

[DrPizza]

Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
I think we are at the point where human evolution is ending. That is not the same as development.

Evolution is a natural process. What I think will happen is massive genetic manipulation coupled with the incorporation of synthentic components to aid memory, physical performance etc. Tomorrows "human" won't be. Those who do not conform to this process of "improvement" will be a disadvantage, so much so that they will probably not be allowed to breed. THey will die out, except perhaps for a few vestigal groups placed on "preserves" I would expect to see this in a thousand years or less. In ten thousand years, the decendents of humanity will be completely beyond our comprehension. By comparison, we will seem like rodents, and not very smart ones.

Wow, what a simple solution! Almost works for me!

 

[DaveSimmons]

I see a Gatacca future as most likely, as rationalism continues to win out in Western society the reluctance to "play god" will diminsh and after a few horrifying failures genetic upgrades will become more and more common for children of the wealthy and eventually the middle class.

Eventually, as in Gatacca, the engineered will dominate in most areas of society and "normals" will be shut out of upper-level positions.

And if SF books are any guide we'll eventually have military lab super-soldiers, hyperr-evolved psi-powered world dominators, etc. etc.

Either that or we'll finally crack the AI problem, create intelligent machines to "help" us, and end up as batteries or fighting an army of terminators.

 

[Wag]

The Time Machine is an allegory of the class struggles in England during the late 19th century. Seriously, it is.

Read it. Good stuff. HG Wells' stuff is all good.

 

[Jeff7]

Originally posted by: DrPizza
1. So that this thread doesn't turn into a debate about evolution, this thread assumes evolution is the correct model for the development of species. If you want to debate evolution, start your own thread.

What do you foresee as the future of mankind, in terms of evolution of our species (and assuming we don't annihilate ourselves in nuclear war or something)

I keep thinking about it and have been considering that we could possibly evolve into 2 species, with intelligence being a distinguishing characteristic. "Smart" people tend to marry other "smart" people. While this isn't a rule, the probability of a smart person marrying another smart person is much much higher than random chance. Thus, mates are chosen for this trait.

And, unintelligent persons typically marry other unintelligent persons. As intelligence is partially hereditary, their offspring will tend to be less intelligent as well.

Thus, gradually over 1000's of years, we may end up with 2 groups that vary significantly in intelligence. Survival of the fittest: the intelligent people rely on their intelligence to make their way in the world. The non-intelligent people rely on other skills to make their way in the world.

What bothers me is that there is continuous intermingling between the two groups, but I suppose the same has happened at other times with divergent evolution.

And, a problem: the "intelligent" group typically waits until later in life to have children, and generally has fewer offspring than the less intelligent group. Would the intelligent group get overrun by the unintelligent group?

The other thing about waiting until later in life to procreate - the offspring generally live longer too. If the body thinks it has to stay alive longer to reproduce, it will hold up better.

My view on it overall is that human evolution, at least in the survival-of-the-fittest sense, has stopped. Weak genes are aided by medicine and science. Genetic manipulation would need to be dispensed by a governing body, and done in a very subtle, steady fashion, so that the previous generation wouldn't be able to tell what the "enhanced" generation has acquired. Of course, people wouldn't like this one bit, not knowing what they're receiving. But otherwise, we wind up with a world like that in the movie Gattaca - the privelaged, genetically pure run the world. The unenhanced, naturally born are relegated to menial tasks, and are ridiculed and repressed. It would be just one more way to widen a gap between privelaged and underprivelaged.