Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry
Beneficial to reproduction, obviously, which would be the only thing (besides eating, breathing, sleeping) that we would be present for without society.
There are plenty of people walking around with other genetic ailments, too. That doesn't make it natural just because it's there.
Let me clear up that by natural I mean no genetic mistakes/differences in chromosomes/etc what-so-ever. Not that they create themselves, or anything. Just that as being birthed with social anxiety or something of the sort, it's not 'natural'. (not putting the two on the same plane, just saying) I think you're having a difficult time understanding what I mean by that.
|
Okay .. You need to understand things from a gene point of view.
Imagine that you are a gene. You work in a way that you decrease fecundity in males, but at the same time, when you are in a female, her fecundity is increased so much by your presence that on the whole, having you in a population of 50/50 male to female ratio leads to a net increase in overall fecundity. Is your presence in a population "beneficial" to reproduction or not?
When discussing stuff like this, you have to look at the evolution of the genes - the genetics - not the people who possess them. I think you have a hard time getting your perspective right.