I reserve the right on this blog to post random things from time to time and this post is one of those random things. I can never be "off topic" since there is no topic.
I was on guard today when I had an epiphany. I don't have epiphanies often but I have guard often and guard affords one time to think. I mean what else are you going to do when you are in a guard tower alone for hours at a time? (Well, there are other things but we can discuss that at a later time.)
I think many of the problems of modern society are directly related to the fact that basic human physiology was designed to survive primitive conditions. The traits that enabled man to survive primitive conditions can go haywire when faced with modern life.
For instance, consider obesity. I believe that the reason so many Americans are fat is that the human species original primitive instinct was to eat everything fat and sweet in sight. Fats and sugars are easy calories - they provide the most calories for the least effort. Assume that humans commonly lived through famines; individuals that maximized their caloric intake were most likely to survive. The easiest way to maximize caloric intake is eat nothing but fat and sugar. The logical thing for primitive man to do was to love the taste of fat and sugar. In modern times, gorging oneself on fat and sugar isn't the healthiest thing to do; but now you can blame your primitive ancestors for your sweet tooth.
Primitive brains lead people astray when it comes to sexual differences also. There is a theory that women only developed prominent mammary glands when humans began walking upright. Before, men were drawn to the curve of the female buttocks from behind. When humans began walking upright, the buttocks were no longer at eye level. Women began attracting their mates with enlarged mammary glands that looked like buttocks in front. To this day, the average male cannot distinguish a butt crack from cleavage. Something to think about when donning low cut attire. I'd also like to say that when a man leers at a woman's bosom, he is only succumbing to the instincts that kept him alive in primordial days.
I could go on, but I'd probably lose my female audience.
Why is any of this relevant to my situation? Why was I thinking about any of this? Life in the 1-503D was pretty primitive for a while. I think even cave men bathed more and ate better than we did for a while. Also, a man's ideas about sex tend to regress in the absence of women.
*Disclaimer: I don't believe in evolution but I think that evolutionary theory provides a useful framework for thinking about the development of living organisms. Most of my ideas came from theories having their basis in evolution.
7 comments:
Idaho - How can you not believe in evolution? You just talked (at length) about it???
I think you were thinking about all of the eating/food issues because you are getting ready for leave, losing weight, etc. Oh the anticipation!
Don't worry about losing your female audience - middle aged women are very devoted and forgiving. I am sure you would prefer the younger more 'flighty' audience instead, however! Don't blame you ~
Take care ~ JudyM
I'm right there with Judy -- irrespective of the scientific-philosophical debates, our friendly medic blogger did just use one of the fundamental tenants of evolutionary theory (natural selection) as the basis for his whole epiphany, thereby supporting the theory of evolution (which was slyly call a "framework"), which was all then in turn brushed aside. Some nice circular logic you have there, our main medic in the field! :-) (*disclaimer: these comments are just for fun and not meant to be argumentative...)
That said, interesting epiphany. Isn't there some war proverb about the wisdom of the foxhole? I'm just glad a soldier in your corner of the world has the time to think about such things in such circumstances - means bad things ain't happening at the time.
Stay safe & keep posting,
-- Ryan
I accept that natural selection does take place in species today. I think that natural selection is the mechanism that prevents harmful new mutations from killing entire species, but I find it hard to believe that an entire species can arise from another through natural selection. Mutation is an inherently destructive process. It goes counter to the principle of increasing entropy, the second law of thermodynamics, that any system can become increasingly ordered over time. In fact, I think that species degenerate over time. In fact, I think there is already evidence that the Y chromosone in man is slowly deteriorating in each generation. Eventually, unless some outside force acts to preserve the quality of the various Y chromosones human reproduction will eventually come to a screeching halt(in the extremely far distant future).
I reject evolution for a multitude of very complex reasons, the most important being my inherent dislike of the theory itself.
how about a hoo-rah for non-military thoughts!
you are definitely on to some of the scientific criticisms of evolution and clearly have plenty of evidence to support your view, which is admirable, and of course philosophical issues were only hinted at here. One simple correction and then I'll be quiet: entropy (via dictionary.com) is the "measure of the disorder or randomness in a closed system" or the "inevitable and steady deterioration of a system or society," not the movement towards order. Complexity Theory researchers are on the illusive search for a counter-balancing law to entropy, which would describe how some systems are moving towards increased order and self-organization. Species degeneration is an active and widely held view, with some viewing it as countering evolutionary examples and others viewing it as supporting evolution (e.g., island birds that lost the ability to fly when they had all the food they needed from fishing -> evolution or degeneration or both?).
Your readers (middle-age women and one academic nerd?) would gladly read more of your guard-tower musings. I still like your original hypothesis that human physiology was "designed" to survive primitive conditions. good stuff.
hope all is well in the desert,
- ryan
Whoops, I must have a very awkward way of putting things. When I said:
"It goes counter to the principle of increasing entropy, the second law of thermodynamics, that any system can become increasingly ordered over time. In fact, I think that species degenerate over time." I meant that disorder always increases. We live in a world of increasing disorder that we are able to impose order on every once in a while. Humanity's best hope is our ability to think and impose order.
chalk that one up to misinterpretation of the sentence. it makes sense after a closer reread. I think there are ordering forces in nature with and without the influence of humanity, and that the yin-yang dynamic between order & randomness is one of the more provocative issues out there, spanning pretty much every branch of thought - metaphysical, religious, scientific, sociological, ecological or whatever. If there wasn't something balancing entropy, we never would've made it this far.
Hmmm, like I thought Idaho, you are looking forward to some R&R. Entropy, thermodynamics........ clogs up one's brain! Take care! JudyM
Post a Comment