humans VS the wild
- Thread starter livebearerfreak
- Start date
One guy lost in the wilderness would have a lot of problmes and probably not make it, no matter what others say, imho. And die of disease, of hunger, etc...
If everything went upside down, for everybody, humans would start again, joining in tribes, eventually, but i really think the first generation would fare very badly.
And let us not forget the inherent badness in man. The worse kind of people would allways fund a way to band together and barbarism would be on the menu....
How about some doomsday talk?
There is no inherent "badness" in humans compared to other species. Intraspecific competition causes members of a species to treat individuals in the same species as a threat. We're all vying for the same resources, man or otherwise. Even so, cooperation has its merits for any species. Grooming, sharing food, collectively establishing shelter and other behaviors are frequently found in nature across a diverse range of species. No animal has a society as complex and altruistic as human society. That's the meaning of "society". The shortfalls of modern society do not reflect badly on humans as compared to other species. They reflect that we are a species that deals with both intraspecific and interspecific competition. Animals and mankind engage in a tit-for-tat system. This means that I'll trust you and cooperate with you until you screw me over, and then I'll screw you over just the same. This has been established mathematically as an evolutionarily stable system. In other words, it works.
I'm going to expound upon this further. Consider a society of birds. Birds frequently have an alarm call whenever a predator is spotted. This is not beneficial to the bird making the alarm call, because it makes that bird easier to spot for the predator. However, it is beneficial to the species. The species is not the unit which is naturally selected, but the gene is. Individuals within a species share almost all of their genes. When an alarm call is made, it preserves the majority of the genes of the individual, and even more genes of that species. Now, there exists in any population a group of cheaters. Some birds do not sound the alarm call, and preserve themselves. They may pass on 100% of their genes, but if the population trends towards cheaters, there will be no alarm calls and more individuals within the species will be eaten by predators. This restores the balance of "alarm call" vs. non alarm call birds. Thus, alarm calling is an evolutionarily stable trait, although there will always exist "cheaters" within a population.
I have aboslutely nothing against what you state Wurm.
The problem would appear imho, between the change of societies, and the inherent fight for scraps in between.
And yes, i do think Man is the sole mean animal, due to its weakness and intelligence.
The problem would appear imho, between the change of societies, and the inherent fight for scraps in between.
And yes, i do think Man is the sole mean animal, due to its weakness and intelligence.
Lots of people say that. A typical German eats 200 grams of intestines a year. I call that Saturday
You eat a half-pound of tripe at once? I'm not sure if I should be impressed or repulsed. I do like menudo, but I don't think I could eat that much of it....
Bahahaha, don't you know the earth is only 6000 years old and fossils were put here to make us question our faith?! Duhhh.
That explains the scratches on my back...
Sent from my N861 using MonsterAquariaNetwork App
Dumb people would die, common sense would prevail. Bottom line. the biggest threat would be other starving humans.
Sent from my N861 using MonsterAquariaNetwork App
Sent from my N861 using MonsterAquariaNetwork App
