[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta / roulette ] [ cytube / git ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru / zine ]

/edu/ - Education

'The weapon of criticism cannot, of course, replace criticism of the weapon, material force must be overthrown by material force; but theory also becomes a material force as soon as it has gripped the masses.' - Karl Marx
Name
Options
Subject
Comment
Flag
File
Embed
Password (For file deletion.)

Join our Matrix Chat <=> IRC: #leftypol on Rizon


 No.7049

Hello, I was petting my dog earlier today, he's pretty old, and it got me wondering - why, evolutionarily speaking, do animals or organisms in general (including humans) keep on living after they are no longer able to reproduce due to age?

Wouldn't it be better for the survival of the species if they just died after they couldn't have kids anymore? Evolutionarily they have no purpose right?

Is it just so they can help to raise offspring? But elderly animals continue to consume resources that could go towards young, so isn't it still a net loss overall?

 No.7050

Evolution is just a description of what happens, it does not give purpose to anything. Nothing has "evolutionary purpose", it's a meaningless term.

 No.7051

>>7049
>why, evolutionarily speaking, do animals or organisms in general (including humans) keep on living after they are no longer able to reproduce due to age?
Older members of a community can provide guidance (think village elders and matriarchal/patriarchal familial structures), care (thanks tondecades of knowledge and experience in treating people, modern medicine is not very old), education, and so on. You see this in mammals, where the older members are the guides/leaders cause they know where the water is, food, shelter, where to move, seasons, etc.
>Wouldn't it be better for the survival of the species if they just died after they couldn't have kids anymore? Evolutionarily they have no purpose right?
No. Who'd protect the offspring? This is especially true for humans. We're unique in the animal kingdom because out offspring can't realistically take care of themselves for ten years or more.
>Is it just so they can help to raise offspring? But elderly animals continue to consume resources that could go towards young, so isn't it still a net loss overall?
Their value far outweighs what they use in resources. Some human cultures have practiced senicide.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senicide

 No.7052

>>7049
>a thread died for this
back to >>>/leftypol/


Unique IPs: 4

[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] | [Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta / roulette ] [ cytube / git ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru / zine ]