Or does it? I mean, just look at bacteria. They most likely don’t even have a clue they exist. No friends, no family bonds, no culture, no feelings. Yet they’ve been extremely successful over the past… 4 billion years!
One of my tutors once said: “You can talk about the dinosaurs’ era or human era, but that’s all nothing. It’s been bacteria era all this time!” And it’s true. Even today they’re everywhere and in unimaginable numbers.
They can live in toilets, feed on rotting flesh, die in their thousands and they simply don’t care. They multiply and thrive. Put them on a Petri dish with something to eat and they’ll happily use all the supplies and then… starve. There will be no planning or saving for future. Only a mindless race – eat more and multiply faster!
Since this strategy has worked so well for so long, doesn’t it mean it’s simply the best? Doesn’t it suggest that mindless, inconsiderate growth, no matter the cost, is the way to go?
I know. We should be on a totally different level. “How can you even compare us – humans – to bacteria?” I hear you ask. “They’re just simple, tiny, unicellular organisms, and we are big, complex and intelligent animals.” I’m afraid that doesn’t change the fact, that in a rapidly-changing environment quantity usually beats quality. And this rapidly-changing environment has been created and fuelled by none other but ourselves.
We’ve always had great impact on our surroundings. We’ve created tools, cleared forests, built huge settlements and domesticated many species. That’s probably because we’ve had very clever and resourceful competitors – other humans. But ever since the industrial revolution, things have been galloping so fast, even we – humans – find it difficult to keep up.
So should we slow down, think about the future and quality of our lives, making it easier for others to leave us in the dust?
To Be Continued
This is dumb. You equate success at mass reproduction with quality of life. Bacteria has no quality of life; humans (and animals ) do. Evolution doesn’t care about it, not just because it doesn’t have the capacity to care, but also because well being is weakly related to reproductive success. And if it was attempting to maximise well being, it would suck because evolution has more in common with a blind idiot god  than an omni-benevolent omnipotent one.
Evolution doesn’t care about quality of life…
Or does it? I mean, just look at bacteria. They most likely don’t even have a clue they exist. No friends, no family bonds, no culture, no feelings. Yet they’ve been extremely successful…
“You equate success at mass reproduction with quality of life. Bacteria has no quality of life”
Nope. I don’t. I’m only using it as a somewhat humorous example to introduce the idea. There will be more (this is just part 1) and I promise it’ll make more sense when I’m done 🙂
Cheers, I appreciate it!
My partner and I absolutely love your blog and find almost all of your post’s to be what precisely I’m looking for. Does one offer guest writers to write content for you? I wouldn’t mind creating a post or elaborating on most of the subjects you write about here. Again, awesome web site!