Seriously, Darwin, WTF???

6 replies [Last post]
Offline
Joined: 08/25/2009
Posts:

First off, there's so much I'd like to catch up reading on here, but I'm eyeball deep in school work since I'm back to being a full time student. Thanks a lot for all the great distractions from what I'm supposed to be doing right now . . . maybe this weekend :-)

So yesterday we had a Physiological Psychology monster of an exam. The teacher was kind enough to not follow with a 2 hour long lecture on the Evolution of the Brain. She, instead, popped in a PBS DVD on Darwin for us to passively enjoy. This was interesting especially since I didn't know shit about this man's life.

The dramatizations show that he's traveled all over the place & eaten all sorts of exotic animals. He's about to come upon his theory on natural selection, when he decides he wants to marry his first cousin . . . a devout Christian. His brother (who seems like a guy I'd have liked to party with), is like, dude, is it just because she's the only woman you've come in contact with in a while? Darwin laughs, reads the New Testament for her, puts aside his blasphemous studies, marries her, becomes fruitful and multiplies.

Then we see that Darwin has health problems, stomach/gut problems to be specific. He is given a strict diet & ice baths. From a Psychoneuroimmunology point of view, I'd guess his gut was manifesting his internal struggle between his brain and his dick. His brain knowing he's on the brink of coming to a more logical explanation on the orgin of species, and his dick knowing that reaching that brink might leave it out in the cold, out of his cousin's nice warm twat. Anyhow, he abandons his brain, goes to church, and makes more babies.

One of his favorite daughters ends up having tummy trouble too. He says in the movie, "it's my fault, I knew that children of first cousins are weaker." The girl dies. He abandons Christianity.

Now my question is, after all his traveling & sampling of exotic cuisine, after all his research showing nature's desire to increase its variability by mating with wildly different genotypes, how the fuck does he come to select his very Christian first cousin for reproduction????

Instead of spending every day playing with dead finches, he could've been engaging in his own sexual experimentation. I mean, I know he was no Mendel, & that heredity wasn't really his thing. But like, couldn't he have explored the exotic pussy in all the lands where he was studying geology instead of just eating different animal meats? He could have reproduced with some hot Tahitian momma, Ecuadorian babes, had different hoes in different time zones, etc. He could've examined phenotypic differences in his different offspring in different continents. He could've written his theory in one of those different countries & sent it back to England for review while safely enjoying his freedom from possible heresy charges.

But no, he stays in England, fucks his cousin, and agonizes about whether or not he should continue his blasphemous research. I'm a bit disappointed. I expect a bit more from an evolutionist.

Bogus's picture
Offline
Joined: 08/24/2009
Posts:
It made me think, it made me laugh

Thanks adaptogenie, that insight of the human ability to hold two contradictory and different ideas simultaneously made me laugh out loud.

Then, pedantically, I had a little Google, and it turns out that the evidence for children of first cousins suffering birth defects seems thin - about the same percentage as (say) the children of women who give birth in their 40s. Or so that magazine says - but perhaps they get funding from the inbred Rothschilds!

As ever, nature appears more complex than at first glance.  Darwin did his work on plants, and some even self-pollinate, don't they (grass, for instance, seems capable of this, I believe)?

I have always believed in hybrid vitality, and happy mongrels and all that. And I always loved sniggering to myself about inbred Royalty in Europe.  hey ho.

It still made me laugh out loud, though, so thanks!

 

"You mean my whole fallacy’s wrong?"
Marshall McLuhan

Offline
Joined: 08/25/2009
Posts:
survival of the easiest?

I hear you. I really don't have anything against people hooking up with their cousins. I just think that Darwin, a person who bred pigeons & plants for variability, would want to get a bit more creative with his own breeding partners. 

Also, in class, we discussed how the human brain tripled in size over its 5 million year development & then reached a plateau. I love how Vonnegut laughs off the significance of our "big brains" in his book Galagapos. Our class discussed how increase in brain size became not cost effective since it would make gestation longer, birthing harder, and require more parenting to develop the bigger brain. This all makes sense to me. But I can't help but also wonder the following:

1. Survival of the Easiest?

What about all the members of a species that simply aren't all that selective & let any loser male knock them up? They'd be producing more than the picky selective bitches, and populating the earth with all sorts of less fit sperm. I understand how the Survival of the Fittest argument works, but I think that only makes up a percentage of entire species populations.

 

2. Big Brains pick pick Braun?

Perhaps big-brained humans would pick big muscled men to do all their grunt work & produce well balanced children with well rounded physical and mental skills.

 

3. Big Brains electing not to reproduce?

I know that most times humans these days reproduce, it's generally not planned. Perhaps (very generally speaking) more of the people who consider all the work & responsibility involved elect not to reproduce or have very few children.  Those who are selective about their mates & environments, don't feel comfortable reproducing due to too many variables or whatever. For instance, some babboon females take birth control during rainy months! They know it would suck to be pregnant & give birth certain times of the year, so they eat lots of these plums that make them sterile.

Again, I don't think it would be cost effective for our brains to be any bigger. However, I also think we've let "survival of the fittest" go a long way without coming up with other factors that may have had just as great an impact on the current populations that have evolved into existence.

fuzzbuddy's picture
Offline
Joined: 08/24/2009
Posts:
I Just read this

and it looks interesting to me:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/mar/19/evolution-darwin-natural-selection-genes-wrong

I also glanced at an article recently that mentioned Einstein married his first cousin too.

Offline
Joined: 08/25/2009
Posts:
Awesome article fuzzbuddy,

Awesome article fuzzbuddy, thanks so much!!!

Interesting about Einstein. I don't have anything against cousin fucking/marrying. I was just surprised Darwin stuck to the shallow end of the gene pool.

Yesterday I was playing in the tide pools of Southern California. I love all the creatures in those areas. They have to be so ballsy & tough to live in conditions that vary so drastically throughout the day. It got me thinking of all the animals that had to migrate because they weren't making it where they were at & had to do something. Like there were the animals that didn't mind staying & competing for resources, & those who'd rather migrate & adapt to areas with less competition.  I really have to read Darwin in detail & reflect on my ideas, known history, & possible futures for evolution. 

Bogus's picture
Offline
Joined: 08/24/2009
Posts:
Tide Pools

 A very evocative reference for me, as I ended up living on the beaches around Bolinas in the early 70s, taking windowpane acid,  synthetic psilocybin (rather good little white pills, a really smooth ride) and smoking grass (of course).

I fell in love with tide pools (as you may well imagine) as the scale of my perceptions changed - from one small human on a beach somewhere in spacetime, with the same old ocean tidal movements and sunsets since the beginning of time, with no watch or calendar to link me to the city - to that 'god-like' perception of those tiny worlds between the tide coming in and allowing emigration, and the tide going out (leaving critters stranded with their 'choices' or fate, until the tide came in again).

I used to zoom in on tide pools... (having migrated, myself, without resources, from the London/Paris scenes I had failed to adapt to...when given half a chance.)

 

"You mean my whole fallacy’s wrong?"
Marshall McLuhan

Offline
Joined: 08/25/2009
Posts:
sea anenomes

I love playing with the sea anenomes & got to play with a starfish last time. I LOVE the tide pool creatures like they're my grandparents or something. I'm madly in love with the ocean & am so glad I live relatively near it again.