ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel

Darwinism selectivity Philosophy

Updated on January 23, 2012

The moment we are born we are set a simple goal, the goal of surviving. Called darwinism, the idea that the one that wants to survive the most will be the one that will survive. Throughout time we have lost the essential selection of the fittest we used to have. With the help of doctors, for example, children that should have died in the womb are born, men that should have died of cancer survive. Does this mean that we are losing the essential animal selection that nature puts us through? Is this change we are making, really affecting us in the long run? We have just reached 7 billion people in the world, and is seems that over population is a problem we might be confronting soon. We will reach a point when the number of people will surpass earth's capacity. In the same way, we the people are destroying our planet. By putting more humans on earth we are only accelerating the mass destrucion of planet earth. When we reach the breaking point, what will we do? We are not even near ready to migrate to the moon, even worse another planet. So, what is the solution to our situaion? The only solution I can think of is the reconstruction of the naural selection. Not that this benefits me personally at all; I was born by c-section, without it, it would have been impossible for my mother to give birth. This would have resulted in my death as an unborn child and most probably of my mother's death also, which would mean that neither of my two brothers would have been born. Out of my family of five only one would be alive right now by natural selection. And what about my future children? And my sister's children? And my brother's children? If we apply this selection to every family in the world, we would not be even close to 7 billion. Overpopulation would not be a problem, less resorces would be needed for the survival of humanity, the destruction of our home would not be a present situation. But is that really the answer?

Or is it that nature will catch up with us eventually? What is global warming? Maybe it is nature's way of forsing us into natural selection, putting us through the extreme conditions where only the fittest will survive, only the most intelligent one will survive. And many will die, but we will be restored to balance. Is it that either the easy way or the hard way we will be restored to balance? I believe that we will be restored. We are getting too separated from the basics, but eventually we will have to come back. Balance will be kept, that is ultimelty the most important thing. Many will have to die for the survival of the rest, simple, basic SELECTION.



    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No comments yet.