Not your typical thought on evolution (at least for me)

[inside the sun]

Our bodies haven't devolped or evolved really because our technology is our evolution.

i.e. We don't have wings because we don't need them, with our planes, jets, etc...
We don't need means of being able to accelerate and pick up and maintain a higher speed with our bodies because we have created automotives
We don't need to devolp better hearing, or sonar location, or anything because we have made devices for those
We don't need fur or hair all over our bodies because we have made shelters, and clothing

Our technology is our evolution and it gives us the same abilities that animals naturally have

[TheBigDog]

Spectacular observations inside the sun. Now take it one step further. What are the implications of technological evolution on the evolution of the human animal?

Bill

[Boerseun]

Well, humans (physically speaking, of course) suck at nearly everything. We can't run fast (never could), we can't fly, we don't have talons, our canines are our only natural weapons, and they've atrophied due to our generalized diets to an akward bastard offspring that looks like a molar from the left and an incisor from the right.

And it is exactly this generalization in our design that necessitated the invention of tools, seeing as we had to come up with something to make up for our general suction.

And tool use stimulated brain growth, which enabled more complex tool design, which stimulated more brain growth, which enabled yet more complicated tool design, which... you get the picture.

This generalized design has taken us from flint knives to hydrogen bombs. It could be said with some justice that The Bomb is simply a Very Big Hammer. This process is still going on, but with the increase in knowledge, and the sophistication of our modern-day 'flint knives', compartementalization of knowledge has become necessary. No one person could rebuild society based on what he knows. A person can be a rocket scientist, but know precious little of the metallurgy required to cast his booster's combustion chamber parts, or know much about the refinery processes involved in getting his fuel.

So it is debatable whether the increase in compartementalized knowledge would stimulate further brain growth. Seeing as we live in a society that praises mediocrity and allows the stupid to breed like rabbits, brainy people seem to be selected against, funny enough.

[orbsycli]

here's where mind evolution kicks in

[inside the sun]

This generalized design has taken us from flint knives to hydrogen bombs. It could be said with some justice that The Bomb is simply a Very Big Hammer.

i believe it was einstein who said that a bomb is like matches, it has the power to do a lot of damage,so with greater power comes more resonsiblity.

What are the implications of technological evolution on the evolution of the human animal?

please explain a little better or give an example so i can answer thank you

[ingannilo]

Myself, I've always thought of technology as evolution.

For something to be a part of the human essance doesn't require it to be flesh and blood in my opinion.

I cannot spell.
It'll become more evidant over time I'm sure, try to look past this in my posts.

But an example:

a sufficient percentage of people consider their job as much a part of their identity as their ability to shit. Making, in my eyes, the building in which their job takes place, aswell as whatever means they need for the job an evolution of humanity, just as serious as gills. This'd include everything from the clothing to the machinery.

Nothing we develop internaly could exist without the existance of the things we consume, so it is my assertion that anything remotely a part of a consciousness' identity is just as much a part of the entity as it's consciousness.

John

[sanctus]

Actually can't we see technological evolution and human evolution as the same thing? Didn't they sort of go hand in hand? For example the more and more tools we had the less we needed our canines hence they "disappeared".

[inside the sun]

Actually can't we see technological evolution and human evolution as the same thing? Didn't they sort of go hand in hand? For example the more and more tools we had the less we needed our canines hence they "disappeared".

yes that was my point orginally made, or what i meant.

[ingannilo]

Originally Posted by sanctus

Actually can't we see technological evolution and human evolution as the same thing? Didn't they sort of go hand in hand? For example the more and more tools we had the less we needed our canines hence they "disappeared".

Exactly the point I was trying to make.

Technology specific to humans is just as much a part of the evolutionary process as aposable thumbs.

John

[TheBigDog]

Originally Posted by inside the sun

please explain a little better or give an example so i can answer thank you

An example I always see is reproduction. It used to be that infertile couples only had the option of adoption. Now we can get pretty much anybody pregnant. But that means that the children of infertile couples are passing on the genetic trait of infertility, where it used to not pass so easily. So with each subsequent generation we will become more dependent upon technology for fertility. Technology changes the animal.

Sanctus gave the example of the canines disappearing. Can you think of any others areas where we will replace a natural function with technology?

Bill