• Mothra@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    11 months ago

    There’s not enough generations of humans to evolve significantly under 1000 years. Especially since we have been living under relatively no evolutionary pressure to change dogma and violence

    • derekabutton@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      11 months ago

      Quite a bit of human development has been in the category of nurture, as opposed to nature. While humans have changed little biologically, I have an “appendage” in my hand that can communicate with an individual in space. Memes replicate and evolve much more quickly than genes do.

      • Pons_Aelius@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        11 months ago

        Yes but the change is not permanent. It dies with you.

        All you would need is for the change not to be passed on to the next generation and all that progress is lost.

        We currently spend decades passing on that knowledge to each child.

        If that ever stops, the progress disappears in one generation.

        • Jamie@jamie.moe
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Accumulated knowledge in our society really is frail. Take a computer mouse, tons of people are involved in making them, they’re considered extremely simple tools. Yet not one person on the planet could go out into nature, get the natural resources required, and without help turn those resources into a working computer mouse.

      • Mothra@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        While it is true that we have collectively made significant progress with technology, (if that’s what you mean by “nurture”) it hasn’t changed our aggressive behaviour as a species which is what OP was questioning. Sure, we have made significant changes culturally, technologically, and with memes- so what?

        • derekabutton@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          I suggest memes as in the Richard Dawkins original definition, not funny haha memes but shared reproducible culture. We are social creatures, more than any other, and our social development has happened far more quickly than typical evolution ever could.