Are We De-Evolving As A Species?

I have noticed a weird trend now for a few years:  Are we as a human species de-evolving?

several factors documented in news reports support this thesis.  First of all, let us review certain truths about evolution and progress.  behavior is the [[[[primary, foremost, utmost___]]] is most indicative of evolution.
let me emphasize that behavior is the number one determinant of evolution.  physical or sexual biological imperatives are not indicators of evolutionary fitness, not any more.

1)  in terms of stupidity and/or in terms of being violent and easily excitable.
back in caveman days, stupid or violent overly aggressive people [[[untimelydeqth nope not quite.]]]]
These would have been the first ones to die out.

2)  unfortunately, the behavior indicators of empathy, compassion, and pity for fellow humans -- when together with the former, have a backfiring effect.  from the majority population....
instead of letting violent psychopaths, drug dealers, and other criminals meet their just demise,
__instead we take pity on them and offer them welfare. ((just remb, would have to have been 2005, in my ultra-conservative days of hattting on welfare queens.)))  offer them rehab.  liberals make the rest of society subsidize and give them "guidance" rather than exacting justice and making them pay for their crimes.

3)) also the ones that are horrible at future planning, risk assessment,
e.g. the ones that have way too many babies with no regard to their well-being, their safety, or their probability of living in safe, clean habitable conditions.
--eegg., no regard to how to take care of oneself;;;make one's own livelihood,, no job planning, no career prospects, no thought to how one will support oneself in the future.  nor any future progeny.
--no regard to how they are going to feed and clothe all those offspring.  how are they going to really invents and take care of them in the way that humans do, wash and bathe them, keep them clean, teach them to read and write and count, teach them manners.
--in traditional evolutionary [[[measures, spectrums, spectra]]]
    the extraneous surplus babies would starve and die out.  allowing nature to maintain an equilibrium.  the population numbers of [[[___]] would be kept in check by natural selection.  Even if they were too ignorant to___, nature would make sure they could not get away with it.  (Perhaps "ignorant" is not the correct word; animals are not accused of being ignorant.

***•** notes on whyy hvnf abrt <<<<isss>>> taking care of your reaponsilbity.
** actu not tooo crazy about this
all the reasons that they had a baby out of wedlock and were stupid and irresponsible -- are all the exact same reasons that they would be terrible parents
-so it's better that that they just nip it in the bud.
---save society the pain and heartache ___of having to deal with a juvenile delinquent.  __and save society the pain and suffering of having this individual ___which will probably reach age eighteen and graduate to committing reall crimes.  Better to [[[pree-emptive strike avoid, sidestep, surpass__]]] all that mess,,, save taxpayer dollars having to be wasted on jail, prison, etc.
----[[[itthe creature]]] would be a waste of space and public school efforts trying to civilize it.
,,,before then itwillnprobabl get to age fifteen and create even moreee future juvenile delinquents.  Which in turn would create more once they reach physical maturity.  and perpetuate a cycle that is nothing more than a [[[[vicious circle]]].

this is the MAy-johr indicator.,, the |oiece de resistance**
[[**remember that intelligence is far better indicator of evolutionary superiority than any biological imperative.]]
precisely the reasons that an organism would choose NOTttt to reproduce -- are the exact selfsame reasons that it actually would be a good parent.
--it knows that it does not yet quite have the emotional maturity to raise offspring, nnn guide them and be a parent
--it wants to plan better financially and career-wise so that it has stability and security, and would be able to support offspring.

on the other half of the same coin, we see that the people least-suited to become parents, are becoming parents are greater rates.  the characteristics that make them ill-equipped to be parents, are the exact selfsame characteristics that [[[contribute]] to it reproducing.
(ill-fitted)
..are unfortunately the same characteristics that contribute to tits greater[[risk,]] increased chances of reproducing.
--stronger urges-- primitive biological
--lack of foresight
    would not think ahead to be on birth control
    would not think ahead to how in the world it would support its offspring.
--poor impulse control-- would succumb to primitive biological urges
    would have sexual intercourse without thought to risk of pregnancy
=> ergo, the **less** evolved members of the human race are *more* likely to reproduce.  are going to produce greater numbers of offspring.
=> and ergo, the **more** evolved members of the human race are *less* likely to reproduce.  they are going to___

also another reason-- age of onset of reproduction-- ;;  generally the more primitive and less-evolved the individual, the younger that it commences reproduction.

the less evolved ones are beating out the more evolved ones in sheer numbers alone.


I [[thought about, pondered, (considered)) adding the [[trait, societal stnthin or others]]] about medical advancements.  but then I realized that, it is not entirely relevant to genuine evolution if medical advancements allow prolonged life expectancies of physically weaker individuals.  the physically weaker individuals' less-than-exemplary, less-than-stellar, less-than-perfect medical condition does not automatically render them as being less evolved.

Let me reiterate and emphasize this point:  evolution is not about physical traits.  Evolution is about intelligence and behavior.
--plenty of intelligent, moral people have high blood pressure, asthma, diabetes, food allergies.

for my treatise on how BOTH males as well as females desire physically attractive sexually desirable mates
**put this in my essay of how 2 factors determine a male's reproductive fitness
-looking hot
-procuring stuff, resources, food, shelter, hunt a wildebeest and bring it home

in Neanderthal times, these two factors were caused by one and the same characteristics.  physical prowess directly [[influenced]] the ability to provide for offspring.  in lower primates, lower mammals, many other animal species, the same law prevails.  physical capability, and hence physical appearance of secondary sexual characteristics, determined a male's reproductive potential.

you wanted evolutionary psychology?  you got it.

[[paraphrase below works sources.]]
the answer is simple.  it is because we as a species and as a society are regressing.  we are devolving.  instead of choosing both male as well as female mates for their mental [[advantages, traits __, acumen]]], we are choosing them for very primitive, biologically-driven reasons.  these are reasons that are ingrained in our long-lost ancestry and which we still see today manifesting in primitive animals.

animals do not consider wealth and social status as being separately packaged from physical ability, in the manner that homo sapiens supposedly do consider them separate entities.  to primitive animals, social status and physical prowess are one and the same.  I will explain.  how does an animal gain social status?  by being more physically able than the rest of the pack.  how does an animal gain wealth?  animals do not exchange actual currency, so their status of wealth is determined by ability to procure food.  an animal gets food by being physically strong and fast enough to hunt down a gazelle.  a physically able animal is able to obtain more food by hunting than a less physically able animal of the same species.

how does physical power over a weaker competitor correlate to shelter?  a physically stronger one will overpower a physically weaker one and can take hold of its shelter.  the stronger can kick the weaker out of its own cave.


(((the ""taking pity talking point:::""  or mebe nott;; this might be a third little point addressed after the other two major ones))))
they have more babies than they can reasonably support.
-what is more [[telling,eviedent,astonishingly__]]] is the fact that they seem unable** to determine whether they could support all these offspring -- before deciding whether or not to produce them.
here is another thing.
**they are not consciously making the decision to reproduce and bear offspring.
they are simply giving in to their primitive urges to have sxx, with little to no thought that there are consequences of this basal, instinctual behavior.

in this society we are essentially **rewarding** them for being illogical and unreasonable.  for not planning for the future.  for not doing a risk assessment or ____
instead of [[[[letting them [[[___die out because they were too stupid to plan ahead,]]]] we coddle them.  we reward them with food stamps.  we reward them with government housing paid for by other people's hard-earned money.
-rather than leaving them to their own devices [[and eke out a living for themselves however best they can... we do not allow them to suffer any natural ramifications [[repercussions]]] for their [[monumentally]]poor judgment.
-rather than let them suffer the natural consequences of such woefully bad judgment and primitive behavior,,, [[[the natural progression of the law of [[foreachandeveryactionthereisanoppositeandequalreaction,, nonono,,,, what is it??]]]

back then, the people that stockpiled food for the uncertain future were more likely to to survive.

now, it is a given that many, many, many people in a society do not *consciously** choose to reproduce.
--however, the ones that do not consciously choose to reproduce and yet still come out okay on the other side, are usually in a sustained, monogamous, long-term relationship.  ergo, if they do happen to find that
_they are much better-positioned to be able to absorb the shock, as it were, to their requirements of additional food and additional [[[home,living,abode,_shelter_]]] and other resources.
--wait a minute, what about birth control,,,


**unfortunately, we already bear witness to this in the Indian subcontinent.  thanks to the caste system, there has been little [[[opp of lateral, vertical??]]] [[movin on up, movement,,progress???]]]] of individuals from within one social caste to a different social caste.
Allow me to back up for a minute so I can address the fact that the [[establishers,proponents,implementros,]]] of the social caste system were very [[aware, conscious of intelligence and social differences between the social castes.  The different layers of the social strata exhibited distinct marked differences in behavior -- violent criminal tendencies, sexual tendencies, family planning,___ empathy, compassion,
Also intelligence --pursual of secondary grade-school education,

so there was little chance of genetics mixing.  There was little chance of heritable traits of intelligence and IQ being passed from a higher social caste and infused into a lower social caste.
[littel chance that a higher-order individual's ability for future planning would [[permeate, impermeate]]] the lower social castes and maybe infect them with some intelligence.]]]

the population numbers of the lower castes exploded-- they grew exponetntially,
while the higher-echelon caste members held their numbers more or less steady.  their numbers were not "steady" as in unchanging.  but as in, they were more or less what one would expect if studying a family genealogy tree.

-- whe weree on the subjec,, why do people whi are nittt capablenof raisin a chid--- still reprofice?
-- they kniw rhat they are not capble of raising that kd.  Well, at leats evyine wlse knows this.  It seems this is a stunning revelation that they have not arried at yet.  [[[this stunnig __epiphnY__ has not been revealed to thme yet.  This gospel, this message from the heavens____
--- how stupid are they rhta they wojld risk havin a kid whent they are nowhere near emotionally osychooogzall capable of raising said kid.?
--- it's like they gave no thiuht to it whatsover.  They did not thinkahead to the cinsequces of their actions.  They vuess what-- xessa leads to possible oregn.  This is even tbiug these are very rwal, very ___, very tangible sinsequnces that manifest here in the real physical universe.  This is not just wondering [[[__fancy imaginisnga__ ]] running away with soemknes's imahination.  This takes place in the physical realm.
-- this is all evidence, thise are all facts.

Also discuss this list extnsvelt in my ""devolving essay"".
--why do people in third world countes around the world reproduce??   -when the ludicrously obvious fact is that they will bot be ablee to raise that kid??  Will not be able to support that kid??
--eaisjg ks takes money....
-- it is because they do not possess the capacity to thnk ahead to the consequences of their actions.  -of their behavior.

->>> recvle:::  I have long extolled the thesis that this is bc women are not seen as equal himan beings.

women are the bereers of life, __but this fact is being [[[helf hostage,,_exploited]]] against them. [[[but they are not given any choice in what to do with thier own bodies, they do not possess the power and authority in the marriage to refuse sx..  they do not have acces to birth contorl.__]]]
so they reproduce at uncontrolled rates b/c they do not repsect owmen. buttt...
WHYYY do they think so horribly of women?__
agian, this is due to low evoltuion.
see how once agian, repects and ___ for women is an indicator of evolutioanry profgresss.

all of this further proves what I have been saying for years.
(((this all, again, proves what I have been saying for years.)))
it is **psychological** indicators that are the greatest [[indicator,being able to teell if]]] contributors/factors of an organism or species' evolutionary fitness.
this is because we are humans, we are higher animals.  we have evolved so much that we can consciously decide if biological evolutionary <history>

You know, I was really hoping we could get away from all this primitivity crap and could evolve together into a truly progressive (and I don't mean that as a euphemism for "liberal") future, but I guess not.

"Cheaters" Movie w Jeff Daniels c.2000

I finally got a chance to watch this movie recently.  The "Cheaters" movie about the teacher who helps his students cheat at a regional academic decathlon is based on a true story, like many of the inspirational teacher films.  I won’t tell you where on the internets I found it, because invariably some corporate suck-up is going to cry “ohnoes copyright infringement teh poor megacorporations!”

First of all, I absolutely love this movie.  I love everything about it, from the conflict that the kids faced in the beginning, to the insurmountable obstacles they had to put up with, to the teacher's dilemma, the teacher's decision to do what he had to do to help those kids.  And I can tell you that if I were that teacher, I probably would have done the exact same thing.

But I think we could stand a more thorough analysis of the movie.  It needs to be pointed out that this was a very subtle demonstration of determinism, and this needs to be acknowledged.  This film was not quite as egalitarian, level the playing field, give-them-a-fair-shake as it made itself out to be.

Study the academic team more carefully.  All you have to do is look at them.  And then pan out and study the demographics of that high school as a whole.  What do you see?  Did no one else notice that the high school was predominantly poor and black, and yet the academic team was all poor and white?

In the beginning of the film, the Jeff Daniels' teacher character was saying that they should pare through the entire high school and find the select group of kids that have the highest IQs.  Or highest SAT scores, something like that.  They decided that they should, you know, pick the ones that actually stood a fighting chance to win any kind of academic competition.  And guess what-- they mostly turned out to be white.  I am assuming they did not have a whole lot of Asians at that school.

In a recruitment meeting that was held in the beginning of the movie, there were originally a few black kids that passed muster.  If they were invited to the meeting, that indicated they did in fact have higher IQs than the average student body, same as the white kids did.  However, as soon as Jeff Daniels uttered the phrase "hard work," they were out the door.

At some sort of school district conference in the movie, Jeff Daniels' character brought up some thought-provoking points.  There was a rival school that always participated in the academic competition every year.  Somehow they always managed to win, place, or show, and not by cheating.  Daniels remarked that that school was a private school that operated within the public school system.

Hmm...  That is an interesting way of putting it.  What does it mean?  The points made about safety and violence vis a vis public schools v. private schools are legitimate points.

I do remember that at the middle school I attended, the students were incredibly violent.  This was due to the particular neighborhoods in that school's zoning district.  We had fights break out almost every week, we had bomb threats every month.  This was ameliorated a bit once I got to high school.  The reason for this, and I stand by this firmly, was that the zoning guidelines were very different from those of middle school.  The zoning districts that the high school covered in the town simply did not overlap the poor neighborhoods as much.  (The poverty-stricken, crime-riddled, drug-infested, teen-pregnancy-and-other-illegitimate-pregnancies-with multiple-odd-combinations-of male-and-female-parent-addled.  Most of the high school kids from these types of environments were shunted off to the other high school in town.)  Yeah, the place was crawling with violent ghetto types.  But you know what?  I got over it, I am currently working on my Ph.D. in biochemistry, and those people that got into fights are probably all dead now, due to gang-related warfare or something.

My high school mostly served upper-middle class white families.  (There were very few Asians in the town I where I went to high school.  Otherwise, undoubtedly they too would have attended my high school.)  Remarkably, it seemed that the vast majority of fairly affluent parents simply sent their children to this high school in their district, rather than pay for private school.  Looking back on it now, I realize that this was a short [blunt] miracle that these parents sent their kids to this public school, which effectively elevated the educational standards for all involved.  These were the kids that, in any other town in the US, their parents surely would have sent them to private school and gladly paid the steep tuition.  Just somehow, in this particular town, there were a sizable number of upper-middle class families.  Enough so that if all of them sent their kids to public school, there would be a large enough upper-middle class population so that it would at its core, essentially turn the public school into a private school.

I've been saying this for a long time.  The school in and of itself does not matter nearly as much as the community as a whole.  The socioeconomic makeup of the entire community, i.e., school district, strongly influences the performance of the school.  For example, a school could set high academic standards.  But those standards will not counterbalance the negative effects if the majority of students come from drug-addled home life.  If a large percentage of students come from violent homes with no structure, let alone love, that creates a bad school district.  A bad school district has little to do with the school itself.  The community makes an impact.  If the community members have resources, then the school will receive resources.

So did the cheating help out the kids that entered the academic competition after all?  Yes.  It DID help them out, but only to the extent that they had actual potential and could help themselves out.

See this movie.  Rent it, look for it on the internets, borrow it from a friend, access this movie however you can.  And relish the experience.