Has modern society made human evolution obsolete?

[DuB]

This is something which has been on my mind for a while. I began to discuss it in another thread, but decided to post a separate thread here in Extended Discussion. Before I get to the main issue, let's make an assumption. As Iliad Keys pointed out in the other thread, there are many holes in the theory of evolution. Indeed, the fundamental ideas behind the evolution theory are inherently untestable and unfalsifiable; it takes as much of a leap of faith to accept them as it would for any religion. And those of you who know me know that I am nothing if not a skeptic. But let's just assume for the purposes of this thread that the theory of evolution is correct. That said, discussions regarding the scientific merits of evolution theory, while well worth having, should be saved for another thread. Is mankind as a species done evolving? Has modern society made the process of natural selection obsolete? Consider: There are few ailments which modern medicine cannot cure - in time there may be none. Online dating allows even physically disfigured people to find mates. Technology is in the making which will make energy cheaper and food more plentiful. And it's only a matter of time before we begin inhabiting other planets. There are essentially no environmental pressures to serve as catalysts for evolution. Some have pointed to the rising average height seen in many cultures in the past couple hundred years as evidence that we are evolving faster than ever. But this apparent surge in average height and overall size has leveled off - it appears to have been caused by environmental factors such as improved nutrition rather than genetic or evolutionary factors. It was not nature, but rather nurture. Technology advances faster and faster. But is the human race destined for genetic stagnation?

[The Tao]

I've actually been thinking about this for a while, and talked to a few other people on other sites regarding it. Most species evolve out of a need to do so. As humans, we don't have that need anymore. Instead of physically adapting ourselves to the world, we adapt the world to us. The only people I see continually evolving physically, are those who still do things the old way, back on isolated islands where they have to relie on their own phsyical traits to survive, and not change the land as much. I suspect their evolution will continue, albiet much much slower than normal evolution, but still continue. Meanwhile, those of us who depend completely on technology, will go nowhere physically.

[Oneironaut Zero]

I've thought about this for a little while, too. I'm really not sure, but I think we will still evolve. The only thing is, i think we may evolve in a way that shows us to be more and more dependant on our technologies. Our bodies will become more and more fitted for long periods at sitting at a computer desk; we will become less and less sharp in our reflexes and visual accuities, because they are becoming less and less necessary for survival; our bodies will become less and less accustomed to walking long distances, or bearing any great particular strains, because technology is moving in to fill all of the gaps in our physical lives that evolution was helping us adapt to. With this being the case, we will continue to evolve, but maybe just in a different direction than we have been, before we became so highly dependent on our techno-stuffz.

[Mes Tarrant]

I've thought about this for a little while, too. I'm really not sure, but I think we will still evolve. The only thing is, i think we may evolve in a way that shows us to be more and more dependant on our technologies. Our bodies will become more and more fitted for long periods at sitting at a computer desk; we will become less and less sharp in our reflexes and visual accuities, because they are becoming less and less necessary for survival; our bodies will become less and less accustomed to walking long distances, or bearing any great particular strains, because technology is moving in to fill all of the gaps in our physical lives that evolution was helping us adapt to. With this being the case, we will continue to evolve, but maybe just in a different direction than we have been, before we became so highly dependent on our techno-stuffz. I've thought exactly that. All of a sudden though, that direction no longer makes sense to me... How would that happen if a huge variety of people get to reproduce without discrimination?

[Oneironaut Zero]

I've thought exactly that. All of a sudden though, that direction no longer makes sense to me... How would that happen if a huge variety of people get to reproduce without discrimination? That's a good point, but think about it: As time goes on, development goes on. Places are becoming more and more technology-dependent. "Traditional" spaces are being bought out. Old ways are being thrown into the melting pot. It happens with basically every technological advancement that really catches on: electricity, automated transportation; television; PC's; etc. Even if those people that are still holding on to traditional values and habits continue to reproduce, widespread technologies will (most-likely) find their way into their cultures - maybe even on a small scale, at first, but over time, humans' dependence on technology is much more likely to spread into more and more areas of our lives than to fade away into obscurity. [Edit: If anything, though, as a silver lining: Perhaps our brains will be what do the most evolving. They call this the "Information Age," as anything and everything we want to learn is practically at our fingertips. As technology spreads, this is surely to grow more intense. I can only imagine how intelligent the status quo would be, in the next few decades - barring all our counter-productive distractions like pop culture norms and mainstream media, of course. ]

[Yosemine]

Like you guys (and girls), I have also thought about this. It's a tough one, because you have to remember that evolution is based completely on your genes; if you study hard and become knowledgeable about a certain subject, it doesn't mean your kids will obviously. That means that while people may be getting fat and lazy later in life due to lack of physical exercise, they still have the potential to be thin and fit. Therefore their kids will also have that potential, and if growing up they continue to exercise, then the kid won't be any worse off because his/her parents were lazy and became obese. That would be great if it were the only thing. Then I thought about myself. I'm kind of weak; the only thing I have going for me is that I'm a fast runner. Sure, I might have the potential to become strong, but how strong? Definitely not as strong as a heck of a lot of others. Way back when, I might be dead. When I have kids, they will probably not be too strong either. The "problem" (for lack of a better word) is that people that "shouldn't" be able to survive will. That sounds mean when I say it, but I don't mean it that way (I would have died from pneumonia already myself). That idea would make the human race become progressively weaker as everyone could survive. But then for a while, I bet that now there are many many more times of interracial relationships than before. I'm sure that in most cases this would lead to a stronger child, though quite honestly everything I'm saying I'm assuming. So for a limited time, could we actually get better? I don't know, I just guessed my way through this whole thing. It's funny how I write these things and don't remember what I wrote, and then when I look back the grammar is horrible and nothing connects logically. As usual, just correct any flaws in my logic.

[MrBeelzy]

I think there will be some changes in the brain to come. A lot of aspects of perception, and cognition are affected in adverse ways by our emotions, goals and other factors. Our memories are built to react quickly, not with accuracy. The way the brain works developed in hominids because of their subsistence methods, and the struggle for survival as it were. However, because we do not face choices the way our ancestors did, and out lifestyles have changed so dramatically, the brain will likely adapt. Where this would take us? I don't know, but I'd imagine a slightly less irrational mind, with a memory system that is much more accurate, more like a well organized filing cabinet than our current system.

[DuB]

Most species evolve out of a need to do so. Tao says something important here. A few people have raised the idea that perhaps we will continue evolving, but in a new direction - one which will leave us better adapted physically (as O suggested) and/or cognitively (as Beelzy suggested) to living in a modern society. However, as Tao pointed out, species evolve out of a need to do so. Early organisms that didn't develop the fight-or-flight response got eaten when they didn't respond quickly enough to predators. Organisms that developed a tolerance to certain bacteria and diseases were more likely to survive and pass on their genes. Organisms don't evolve simply because their genes somehow recognize that the organism would benefit from a certain mutation, they evolve because the ones who are best adapted are statistically more likely pass on their genes while the ones who are poorly adapted are less likely to. This survival of the fittest is the theoretical driver behind evolution. But this doesn't apply to modern man. If someone is born with a physical defect such as deafness, they are still very likely to grow to an old age and start a family somewhere along the way. If someone is born with Type 1 diabetes, all they have to do is take insulin and they will likely pass on their genes as well. Conversely, if someone is born with a certain development or "mutation" that makes them more likely to succeed in a modern society, they really aren't any more likely than the deaf or diabetic person to pass on their "superior" genes. Perhaps Fred was born with amazing dexterity in his fingers and can type at 300 words per minute, but does that really make him more likely to outlive an average joe? Maybe Sarah was born with a photographic memory, but does that really make her more attractive to the opposite sex and therefore more likely to pass on her genes? I assert that in both cases the answer is no. Thus, it seems to me that in mastering his environment, man has also mastered the need to evolve.

[Universal Mind]

We are at a point where reproducing is so easy and where our survival is so easy to have and continue to have that I am not sure we are going to evolve too much more. If we were in a more chaotic state like a cave, tribal, or medieval society, we would still be evolving majorly. But Western society has gotten past all of that, and now we are just going to be civilized and safe and be reproducing. This is pretty much it, folks. We are at the big plateau of our billions of years of evolution. We did it!

[Xaqaria]

Evolution doesn't stop. It appears to the layman that humans no longer evolve, but this is not the case. A few of the many recent changes that humans have undergone are; Average height has gone up We have gained the ability to digest milk diversity in skin tone all of which have occurred within the last few thousand years; which relatively is an extremely short time span to be looking at when considering evolutionary changes. Humans will continue to evolve just like everything else. Our evolutionary progress may be altered by our use of technology (although altered is still a pretty relative term) but nothing can slow or stop the progress of change. Some reading on the subject

[DuB]

Well, I sort of covered the rise in height in my original post. Further reading on that can be found here. I'm not quite sure what to make about the diversity in skin tone issue. That part of the link you provided wasn't as clear to me as the part about lactose tolerance, which I thought very interesting and something which I hadn't considered. However, neither point is entirely relevant to the questions of this thread. While 3000-5000 years ago is indeed very recent in evolutionary terms, this thread focuses not on ancient societies but rather on modern society - consumerist society, following urbanization. Obviously we wouldn't be able to see any evolutionary changes in such a short time span regardless, so this thread is pure speculation. This thread considers not evolutionary changes of the past (however recent), but rather potential evolutionary changes in the future. So for example, while the ability to digest milk gave the people in certain ancient societies a clear selective edge, a similar development nowadays would not. In a modern society where practically no one has trouble fulfilling their nutritional needs and where obesity is a much bigger problem than starvation, the ability to digest some new kind of food wouldn't make much difference - unless that food happened to cure cancer. Actually, as I write this I am remembering something. A few years ago they discovered a gene in certain African people that caused the carriers to be more resistant to AIDS, although still not immune. As long as AIDS continues to be such a terrible epidemic (i.e. as long as we still haven't found a cure for it), it's possible that this gene may be selected for over many generations and could lead to authentic, albeit subtle, evolution in modern man. However, that goes out the window if modern medicine happens to find a cure for AIDS - something which seems likely, given enough time. Thoughts?

[ClouD]

We'll adapt to the "problems" facing us. Physical or not, if we will ourselves to change, we will. Society is division. Without it society cannot exist. The more "complex" a society is, the more divided it is. Advancement in technology is irrelevant, except in that it will solve various "problems" that we have, without us having to wait the hundreds of years or so.

[Never]

I've thought about this for a little while, too. I'm really not sure, but I think we will still evolve. The only thing is, i think we may evolve in a way that shows us to be more and more dependant on our technologies. Our bodies will become more and more fitted for long periods at sitting at a computer desk; we will become less and less sharp in our reflexes and visual accuities, because they are becoming less and less necessary for survival; our bodies will become less and less accustomed to walking long distances, or bearing any great particular strains, because technology is moving in to fill all of the gaps in our physical lives that evolution was helping us adapt to. Talk about depressing...

[psychology student]

As said......evolution is no longer about genes but access to technology. Technology = Money. Therefore the richest people will survive. So now it is all about survival of the richest.

[skysaw]

I've thought about this one for a long time. Recently, I've had a few new insights. We want to continue evolving, because we see it as a positive thing. But speaking from an evolutionary perspective, we don't need to evolve at the moment, because we are already very well-suited to our environment. Natural Predators? None; Food? Plentiful; Too cold? Wear a coat; Too hot? Use AC; Disease? Medicine; Disability? ADA; Because of this kind of progress, we no longer have natural selection, however, we still have artificial selection. It all comes down to who is having all the babies. The more children you have, the further into the future your genes are likely to extend. So yes, we do need to sterilize the stupid. All those kids are gumming up the works!

[psychology student]

So yes, we do need to sterilize the stupid. All those kids are gumming up the works! Are you serious?

[skysaw]

Are you serious? Of course not. Just daydreaming...

[Sisyphus50]

Are you serious? I'd say he's being facetious. Having said that, the world is going to have to deal with over-population eventually, we can't keep going the way we're going. Every country in the world should adopt China's 1-child policy and head this thing off now before its too late, but its not going to happen. Anyway, back on topic. I've pondered on this several times in the past. Since humans have become a master of the environment, environmental selection no longer works on us. We shape our environment, it does not shape us. However sex selection does still work for humans. And what's currently fashionable to the opposite sex can change depending on the state of our collective moral and social zeitgeist. Not even 200 years ago, it was considered GOOD to be fat and ghost white. It meant you were rich, you could afford to eat and not work. Women were prized for having huge asses (and dresses were made to give the impression of a huge ass when there wasn't one). But things have changed. Now we understand what a healthy body weight is, and public attitude and sexual desires have changed to accommodate that. Now being muscular, lean and athletic is considered the epitome of sex appeal to the masses. Without putting too fine a point on it, there are too many of us now. In a few short years there will be 7 billion of us roaming this Earth, and most of us live in total squalor. A third-to-half of the worlds population live in China and India. For man to evolve physically again as a species it would take a global event. A devastating plague, a climate shift of huge proportions, something that exhibited a selective pressure on the entire species, not just one continent or area. Since that is rather unlikely to happen, I'd say we're stuck in the mud for now. If Peak Oil Theory is allowed to run its course we're going to have a population overshoot of horrific proportions (a few billion dying of starvation) unless world governments pick up the ball and hit the ground running with renewable energies. And most of the people that die will be in the third world, unfortunately, since they're barely getting enough food to get by as it is. The only other kind of evolution we're going to see from here on out is social evolution. As each older generation dies off, and the newer step up to take their place, the moral/social zeitgeist will continue to change toward a more tolerant, peaceful society that is more in harmony with the needs of nature, instead of exploiting the planet and one another. The environmental movement is almost 40 years old, and only just now is the world at large starting to get the picture that we're all on this bloody rock together, so we better make the most of it, and make it last. Personally I think a discovery of life on another planet (even if its an algae-like cell on Europa) would have immense implications for social evolution on planet Earth. I just hope I'm around to see it. I'm sorry to say that people aren't going to be developing super healing abilities, telepathy and adamantium claws anytime soon

[Taosaur]

As Moonbeam brought to our attention a while back, Look out, future, because here we come: scientists say the speed of human evolution increased rapidly during the last 40,000 years -- and it's only going to get faster. You'll find a link to the study under the article, but the gist is that statistical analysis of the human genome shows positive selection occurring at more than ten times the rate exhibited in humans' and chimps' common ancestors. Raw population growth is one factor, but the data suggests that our increasingly elaborate civilization exerts more selection pressure on the species than wilderness, not less. Of course we're not selecting for traits adaptive to a jungle--we don't live in a jungle. We live in an environment composed mainly of other humans and their symbols, systems and artifacts, so these are the conditions to which we adapt, and they are far more demanding than predator-and-prey ecologies. I suspect we're actively selecting for novelty, too, within certain tolerances, an adaptive strategy with its own accelerating effect.

[Xei]

Uh oh... Has nobody else seen 'Idiocracy'?

[juroara]

evolution in the modern society is mental, not physical as time progresses it will be more and more difficult for people who are mentally 'weak' to cope. Or a weak personality. A very weak personality for example, doesn't know how to solve a problem. Instead they would get angry, violent, or let themselves get walked all over. And what happens to them? They commit some sort of crime and wind up in jail. They commit suicide. They end up on the street. And so on. the mental and emotional demands on the modern man is high, and has been weeding out people *especially those in jail* who can't cope.

[Xei]

Nu uh. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jqa4LpdtOD8 Skip to 40s.

[Sornaensis]

No. Every time people reproduce; evolution is happening.

[Universal Mind]

Evolution happens fastest when there is mass death and certain organisms have significant survival advantages and when creating and maintaining children is a big challenge. We don't have any of that now. What could happen?

[Xei]

There'll probably be a pandemic soon enough; avian flu or typhoid or something. Then we'll see that kind of evolution in action. The evolution won't do any particular good though, it'll just single out everybody who happens to have the right set of antibodies or other minor mutation; nothing of consequence.