‘Survival of the fittest
Evolutionary theory is considered to be one of the famous theories of all time. The entire theory is based on Darwin’s theory of natural variation and Mendel’s model of genetic inheritance (Rice, 2004). It is considered to be the naturalistic theory of the history of life. This theory introduces a process that involves the simple transformation of life from its simple form to more complex life forms (Denton, 1986). This theory revolves around three main processes variation, reproduction, and selection (Gould, 2002). Similarly, two major mechanisms are involved in driving evolution. The first one is natural selection; it’s a process that causes genetic traits that are essential for reproduction and to become popular in a population. The second major mechanism is considered to be genetic drift. Genetic drift is a process that produces changes in the frequency of traits in a population and these frequencies are random (Johnson, 1993). In this paper we would highlight the fact that evolutionary theory is usually misunderstood by many individuals and would highlight the misconceptions about the concept ‘survival of the fittest.
As far as the theory of evolution is concerned there are some misconceptions regarding it. For e.g. the misconception of the complex organs, the misconception of people coming from apes/monkeys etc, the misconception of the fact that evolution violates the second law of thermodynamics, misconception of survival of the fittest.
The term ‘survival of the fittest is widely understood by many individuals and many people believe that the “fittest” can only be the most affectionate and selfless. Aggression and violence are not associated with the fittest. Therefore, what happens in nature doesn’t justify people’s attitude toward behaving in the same way (Page, 2008). The term ‘survival of the fittest’ generally gives a connotation that the strongest individual will survive in the universe and it presents a picture that brutality prevails in the universe (Vanneli, 2001). The term has different meanings in the biological terms like the cleverest, camouflaged and even the nicest.
The evolutionary theory was initiated by Darwin but the term and the misconception of the evolutionary theory ‘survival of the fittest’ were coined by philosopher Herbert Spencer. In the early stages one must have an idea about the conditions of natural selection to understand the ‘survival of the fittest phenomenon. Natural selection is the creative force in evolution and is mainly responsible for the design of organisms (Greg, 2007).
Variation is considered to be a heritable aspect and a considerable number of populations must believe that fitness must be affected by replicating entries and the variations between them (Northcut, 2004). Survival of the fittest is considered to be a dead end. This misconception is dealt with by business oriented people in a strange way when they relate the phenomenon of survival of the fittest with the evolution theory.
This phrase invokes ideas for the struggle of survival and people might believe that the most violent, most aggressive and the strongest one is the best fit for survival. However, the reality is quite different from it and the word ‘fittest’ doesn’t means stronger or the most aggressive (Monaghan & Just, 2000). This word has other connotations like people who posses attributes like being most cooperative, most productive, optimistic etc. People who are most influential in the world like Einstein, Gandhi, and Newton etc are included in this category and elements of Rambo are not included in it. Cooperation is the basic element of success for life and people can easily succeed in their life if they follow a cooperative strategy and learn how to comprise and on the other hand lead from the front.
Biologically speaking, it’s a misconception that the strongest usually survives and people mostly believe that the strongest, cleverest and the violent members of the society would be the ones who are responsible for successfully reproducing and they are the eligible ones to pass on their genes to the next generation (Everything, 2005). These people believe that technological changes and the introduction of technology over the environment are responsible for survival of the unfit and to have their children (Ratzsch, 1996). Moreover some people usually believe that this phenomenon has accelerated over the recent generations and believe that evolution doesn’t operate on the human species.
This belief is true to some extent and in the past years being the strongest and bearing an aggressive personality was considered to be the sign of victory (Matsumura, 1995). Evolution in today’s world is concerned with this generation and it is believed that it has neither memory not it has insight. It is next to impossible that one can be both a parent and an evolutionary unfit. The term fittest in the phrase ‘survival of the fittest means that “has kids” and then goes deeper into the hierarchy that has “grandkids”.
This fact is quite unsupportable that due to the industrial revolution the effects of natural selection have been removed (Hippel, 1995). The industrial revolution has removed the selective pressures that were operating on the human genome but such pressures aren’t removed by it. The process of selection is happening until some people breed and some don’t. The elements of genes are disappearing and some are transmitting to the next generation (Miller, 2007).
Conclusion
Thus, in a nutshell we can say that although there were a number of misconceptions in the evolutionary theory and many individuals interpret different connotations of this theory. The general public usually attaches different misconceptions with this theory like the survival of the fittest, natural selection etc.
Some people posses a nuisance interpretation of this phenomenon when they believe that the fittest people in the universe are the one who are the finest, strongest or even the fastest. However, fittest are those who have greater number of babies. Although it’s quite possible that people who are stronger, smarter, faster may have more babies but we can’t generalize this phenomenon (Sciences, 1998). A mentally imbalance cult leader who has more babies is considered to be more fit by Darwin’s definition as compared to handsome, strong, famous movie stat who has just one kid.
If we consider it biologically then it can be explained that an individual is considered to be fit if he/she can generate more children and in other words we can say that fitness of an individual is measured by its relative ability and such an individual is considered to be the fittest if he/she can produce more number of copies of his/her genes and these copies of genes will make it into next generation. This statement can be understood by a situation that if person A has four children and person B has two. As the time passes by all of our kids makes it to adulthood then we can evaluate that person A is twice as biologically fit as person B. In the next generation this phenomenon would be transformed into a situation in which more people would be similar to person A that’s why he is treated to be more powerful.
This definition of fitness doesn’t give us a complete idea at the first glance and this definition seems to say nothing. This definition gives a clear statement that people who have more kids have more kids and that’s how they are classified as fittest among others. This would clearly depict that kids usually carry the genes of their parents and if something is present in their genes that would result in more kids then it is highly possible then those types of genes are more likely to be relatively common in the next generation. Similarly, the next generation would include individuals that would more kids then the previous generation.
Therefore, this phrase survival of the fittest can be depicted as the fittest genotype is considered to be the one which actually posses a higher survival rate and have lots of kids that would actually survive. As the environments keeps on changing on continuous basis then the attributes that contributes to the fitness of species also change. It is believed that dangerous environments drive evolution (abarnett, 2008). Due to strong selective pressures actually cause species to evolve rapidly.
Bibliography
- abarnett. (2008). Evolution creationism.[online]
- Denton, M. (1986). Evolution: A Theory In Crisis. Adler & Adler.
- Everything. (2005). Most pernicious misconception about evolution. [online] Web.
- Gould, S. (2002). The Structure of Evolutionary Theory. Belknap Press.
- Greg. (2007). The Three Necessary and Sufficient Conditions of Natural Selection.
- Hippel, A. (1995). Human Evolutionary Biology: Human Anatomy and Physiology from an Evolutionary Perspective. Stone Age Press of Alaska.
- Johnson, P. (1993). Darwin on Trial. InterVarsity Press.
- Matsumura, M. (1995). Voices for Evolution. National Center for Science Education.
- Miller, K. (2007). Finding Darwin’s God: A Scientist’s Search for Common Ground Between God and Evolution. Harper Perennial.
- Monaghan, J., & Just, P. (2000). Social and Cultural Anthropology: A Very Short Introduction . Oxford University Press.
- Northcut, W. (2004). The Darwin Awards III: Survival of the Fittest. Plume.
- Page, M. (2008). Evolution myths: ‘Survival of the fittest’ justifies ‘everyone for themselves‘. [online] Web.
- Ratzsch, D. (1996). The Battle of Beginnings: Why Neither Side Is Winning the Creation-Evolution Debate. InterVarsity Press.
- Rice, S. (2004). Evolutionary Theory. Sinauer Associates.
- Sciences, N. A. (1998). Teaching About Evolution and the Nature of Science. National Academies Press.
- Vanneli, R. (2001). Evolutionary Theory and Human Nature. Springer.