DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum Darwinism In Reverse....gotta stop it!

Go to any High School in America and observe the lunchtime groupings of the cool kids and the athletes and contrast that with the geeks and nerds.
Both seem to congregate with their own with the geeks and nerds using tables closest to the chemistry lab and library while the jocks/cool kids are ruling every where else.

As life progresses after HS the [10%] geek/nerd squads graduate from university and become adult nerds with fine positions and wealth while the other 90% sometimes become very successful but most often struggle through life and far too often fail to become particpating citizens in the community.

The 90% generally have far too much time to their hands and tend to hang with the less upstanding society members so you generally have massive population rates of these unsuccessful people. By contrast the nerdy/geek squad members are concerned with reproducing quality rather than quantity so we become overrun with dumbazzes and underrepresented by intelligent if not clumsy semi geniuses.

My question is that if Darwinism suggests that the FITTEST survive and PROSPER why are there so damn many knuckle draggers still out there????
Hell, how many of them does it take to make the french fries??????????

You might like the movie Idiocracy. Same idea, average man goes 500 years in the future, you should see it.

Look at it this way: for as much as you laud "skilled" labor, you and everyone else in society is entirely dependent on the "unskilled" labor force to maintain the current quality of life. Until that changes, there will be no Darwinian selection.

Because in modern society we support them with welfare checks, where if this was a true natural order, they would be killed off one way or another.

I loved that movie. It was really funny.

Quote:

---

You might like the movie Idiocracy. Same idea, average man goes 500 years in the future, you should see it.

---

No, in natural order the strongest would survive . Eventually the smarter ones would devise a way of leveling the playing field but the big strong dumb jocks would simply take what was needed to survive. I think you underestimate the survival instinct in some of the "lower" species of humans.

My comment was more related to his last comment.

Ralphie, I think, across the board, your premise is wrong.

First I think your premise that 10% of the kids fall into intelligent nerds/geeks and 90% fall into cool mindless athletes is way off. There is a HUGE middle ground of kids who dabble in sports and extra curricular activities, get decent grades, and are generally well liked... you haven't accounted for them at all and they comprise the majority.

Second I know quite a few "cool athletes" who also did very well in school, went to college because of their GRADES and are now quite successful.... and I know more than a few "geeks/nerds" who dropped out of college because they had no direction in life and couldn't adjust socially and now work at the used book store. And I know just a couple "geeks/nerds" who got straight A's, had extremely high IQs and could run circles around most people with a soccer ball... one of them now designs rocket boosters for NASA....

Third, the "cool athletes" seldom have too much time on their hands, they are far too busy, they are used to being busy, they are used to juggling academics with athletics with a social life, it's the "geeks/nerds" who have only academics in their lives who tend to have far more spare time on their hands, become socially recluse, and comprise the vast majority of school shooters. They are also the ones who dream up the pie-in-the-sky ideas which would never become reality if somebody a little more practical didn't come along to actually apply their idea....

In short, it takes a big picture thinker to decide we need a ditch and where it should go, it takes a technical person to design the ditch and make it work, it takes a practical person to estimate the ditch and schedule the work, and it takes another person to actually dig the ditch.... In a world of predominantly "geeks/nerds" we'd have millions of brilliantly designed ditches that never got built... it takes all kinds brother.

Sorry, but that all sounds like mad rambling and wild generalizations based on nothing resembling fact.

He observed this at a high school... what more facts do you need?

Man, if I were to make generalizations based on what I see at my daughters Jr. High... THE WORLD IS DOOMED !!!! We are all going to hades in a side car while watching TRL and Americas Next Top Super Model on the in dash console while texting away on our cell phones and listening to music on our Ipods.

Sounds about right.

I just realized I have become my parents !!!

Yeah, one of those Herm-Afro thingies.

"... but that all sounds like mad rambling and wild generalizations based on nothing resembling fact."

Mad ramblings and wild generalizations you say??? hmmmm???

Maybe you are right but if the top 10% of income earners control 90% of the wealth created in America...it seems to fit that the un-geeky kids, the 90% of the remainder of America, fight over the 10% left on the table by the nerdy/geek overachievers.

This is what Marx foresaw and complained of...but here in America no one is forced into labor camps or some feudal arrangement with no chance of breakout. My question is why the 90% seem to grow and grow with little growth in wealth???????

I guess the reverse Darwinism issue is a false one in the context of monetary success although it appears that the less gifted have achieved population dominance.

Quote:

---

if the top 10% of income earners control 90% of the wealth created in America...it seems to fit that the un-geeky kids, the 90% of the remainder of America, fight over the 10% left on the table by the nerdy/geek overachievers.

---

Actually, the wealthy successful geek is more or less an invention of the tech age of the last 20 years... far too short for Darwinian principles to apply. Before Bill Gates, and back into American History, the really wealthy families either came here wealthy from Europe or they were built by largely uneducated people who worked hard and were willing to be a bit ruthless... fur trading, coal mining, gold mining, auto manufacturing, oil drilling, timber harvesting, large scale farming, this was where your REAL fortunes were built... by men (well, mostly men) who were willing to get down in the dirt and work and were willing to take a chance, and who were savvy enough to know when something was successful and keep at it..... then came the financial markets, which allowed men of means to make money, simply by dealing in other peoples money, which is when the whole "white collar" explosion happened. You could make a fortune without having to get dirty, let other people do it for you..... then came the tech and communication age, which is where we are now... geeks inventing, or re-inventing the next greatest thing in a microchip and becoming rich almost overnight....... Along the way you have Sam Walton and Ray Kroc... both relatively uneducated men who started dynasties.. in fact if I'm not mistaken, more than one of the Walton's resides in the top 10 of the Fortune 400.... They worked hard, invented a better of way of doing something, and multiplied it over and over again..... it's just that with computers, you can multiply things 1000 times faster because everybody has one... everybody, even the people who refuse to shop at Walmart and refuse to eat at McDonalds, in fact most people have 2 if you count the one at home and the one at work......

Quote:

---

it appears that the less gifted have achieved population dominance.

---

Being "gifted" is certainly a subjective term... but my guess is that if you could measure "giftedness" and chart it, you would find the population probably falls on a pretty neat bell curve related to their portion of the population...

Then you also have to consider priorities along with those gifts... take GM and myself, two incredibly gifted people, who choose not to use our gifts to chase wealth, but prefer to balance it with family and other priorities..... does that make us any less gifted or handsome? I think it does not.

So is recon analyst considered skilled or unskilled labor? There's no posting on dawgtalk btw, only reconciling.

Quote:

---

Then you also have to consider priorities along with those gifts... take GM and myself, two incredibly gifted people, who choose not to use our gifts to chase wealth, but prefer to balance it with family and other priorities..... does that make us any less gifted or handsome? I think it does not.

---

Of course if we could bottle GM's Gift, we might be able to solve the Worlds energy problems....

Yes we could, and I could make billions off the sale of nose plugs and air filters

j/k

After meeting a 16 year old Tuesday evening at the spa, I have begun to wonder if I want children afterall....if she were my daughter I would probably run away from home. Seriously...NOT BRIGHT.

"...Then you also have to consider priorities along with those gifts... take GM and myself, two incredibly gifted people, who choose not to use our gifts to chase wealth, but prefer to balance it with family and other priorities..... does that make us any less gifted or handsome? I think it does not"

DCDAWGFAN- as much as I appreciate and marvel at the brilliance and beauty that you and GM possess....I DO NOT HAVE TO CONSIDER PRIORITIES along with ascending success.
Darwin claims that the fittest will survive and become dominant...I want to know why there are so many underrewarded people and so few dominant peoples?

BTW I agree with your choice to choose family over all consuming career opportunities...wish I would have lived it before my heart condition developed.

Quote:

---

I DO NOT HAVE TO CONSIDER PRIORITIES along with ascending success.
Darwin claims that the fittest will survive and become dominant...

---

See this is the problem, you have chosen to equate "fittest" only with academic intelligence.... and you have chosen to equate "success" only with financial affluence.

Quote:

---

I want to know why there are so many underrewarded people and so few dominant peoples?

---

I have a nice home, a couple cars, a good job, and a wonderful family.... Every time one of my kids hugs me and tells me they love me... it's hard to feel "underrewarded" because I don't have a bigger house or more expensive cars...

What does he get as a prize?

Just what I always wanted... a dancing green banana...

Clay says it's a pickle.

a pickle doing the nanner dance? Thats just silly.

But if we're brothers then doesn't that make.... oh who cares, is she cute?

Remember last week somebody told me my family tree only had one branch

Quote:

---

Remember last week somebody told me my family tree only had one branch

---

Incest...The game the whole family can play

"See this is the problem, you have chosen to equate "fittest" only with academic intelligence.... and you have chosen to equate "success" only with financial affluence..."

No sirree DCDawgfan.... I am not talking only about academic or financial ultimate success. I realize that maybe another 20-25 % of Americans are satisfied with their financial/educational level and I'd expect many more to be reaching that point if Darwinism actually came to fruition. It still doesn't explain the huge percentage of underachievers at the bottom of the ladder.

It just would seem to reason that human success and prosperity should exist on a massive scale across the planet with only minor trouble spots where the exceptions prove the rule...that is before those people's become extinct.

But your assuming the human population is enterprising, when in fact the majority are like sheep. They don't think for themselves, they simple follow what they are told, and go about their life on a routine.

it's those few that think outside the box that excel and advance.

Quote:

---

It just would seem to reason that human success and prosperity should exist on a massive scale

---

For their to be a winner, there has to be losers. If everyone was succesful then no one would be. They would only be your avg joe.

This post should be deleted because it is nonsense.

i love when people use COMPLETELY INAPPROPRIATE analogies...

"Darwinism" applies to the survival of organisms subject to environmental pressure...it does NOT apply to humans anymore (those living in industrialized nations, anyway)...in order for the fittest to survive, the weakest must die...we do not euthanize the weak (mentally or physically)...we try to help them out via healthcare, government programs, etc.

i know a lot of people who would prefer it if "the free-loaders", "the retards", "the gays", etc. would just die off, but fortunately, the rest of us have, dare i say, evolved...