• ogmios@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    19
    ·
    9 months ago

    Huh? The whole thing is that the natural order enforces itself, so if you don’t respect it you will suffer from that.

    • spujb@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      42
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      me suffering the consequences of life saving antibiotics: 😱😱😱😱 (the natural order is to die of a bacterial infection)

      • ogmios@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        30
        ·
        9 months ago

        It is certainly hard to swallow as an individual, but consistently rejecting natural selection through technological intervention does eventually create significantly greater crisis. It’s a very difficult problem with modern medicine, where we can always keep more people alive, but the resources required to do so increase exponentially without limit. Death is ultimately one way that the natural world self regulates when any particular species outgrows it’s environment.

        • usualsuspect191@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          23
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          Counterpoint: everything humans do is just an extreme version of other behaviors in the animal kingdom, therefore nothing we do is unnatural. The “natural order” is just doing whatever and following the laws of physics.

          • ogmios@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            16
            ·
            9 months ago

            Certainly, and the consequences of such are also a part of the natural order. Unless you want to argue that free will is a myth, you ought to seriously consider working towards making better decisions rather than complaining about how things are.

              • ogmios@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                9 months ago

                That’s a very interesting subject to explore. If you want my personal opinion on it, free will is an artifact of our limited nature and the resulting inability to consciously perceive how everything fits together in the big picture. It may not necessarily be true, but we also have no other way to live than to assume we can make decisions about what is a good and a bad idea, such as deciding that jumping off a cliff is a very bad idea which will likely result in our death.

        • Dagwood222@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          20
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          9 months ago

          You’re confused. ‘Survival of the fittest’ doesn’t mean physical strength, it means those who fill their niche in the world and live to reproduce. A lion that kills a million deer but dies without reproducing is an evolutionary failure.

          Our environmental niche is to invent and experiment. Back in the day, people thought that cities had reached their natural limit because you couldn’t have too many horses in one place. They thought people would never have heart transplants or IVF.

          • Dasus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            Correct.

            And the “back in the day” you’re referring to was barely a hundred years ago, just to give people some reference.

            https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_horse_manure_crisis_of_1894

            And I also don’t think the earlier person realises that evolutionary pressures still apply despite medicine and tech removing some of things that limited us before.

            That is to say that because we don’t need to worry about certain things which used to be important, the pool of people now “competing” is larger, meaning that competition between needed traits is higher, making for “more fit” individuals.

            In the sense that we don’t need to worry about being physically strong anymore, so we can focus on cognition, and looking at history, the speed at which our intellect (or at least level of tech) has grown — as a species — is pretty fucking insane.

              • ogmios@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                9 months ago

                we’re a few steps away from genetic manipulation on a wide scale

                That actually happens to be within my specific area of study, and you may be overstating things. We’ve only just scratched the surface of genetic manipulation, and nobody really knows how long it will take before we can design effective genetic code deliberately. So far we have determined the nucleotides which build the basic structure of DNA, and found correlation between certain blocks and traits exhibited, but it’s not quite as simple as cutting and pasting those blocks like you’re writing computer code. We have also found further layers of ‘information storage’ within DNA which relates to how those nucleotides are arranged, called epigenetics, which we barely know anything about at all. As things stand with our current level of knowledge, we have established an extremely extensive testing regime for any novel genetic product which takes decades to complete, and which nearly every product tested so far has failed to complete, often due to unexpectedly resulting in sterility and death. It’s a very exciting science, and I have great hopes for what it can accomplish if we don’t kill ourselves first, but it’s a stretch to suggest that it’s just around the corner.

                • Dagwood222@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  I didn’t mean that it was going to happen over night. But it only took them about 30 years to go from the Theory of Relativity to the A Bomb, and about 40 years to go from Goddard’s first rocket to Man on the Moon.

        • Gnome Kat@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          That’s not how evolution or natural selection works. Its a very difficult problem if you completely misunderstand it yea.

        • spujb@lemmy.cafe
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          9 months ago

          what 💀 “we can always keep more people alive” no we cant, people die all the time the fuk is u talking bout homie 😭 😭

        • yesman@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          9 months ago

          You contradict yourself by saying that the natural order rules everything and humans have escaped it.

          Besides, none of our technology has been around on a timescale meaningful to evolution. What your talking about is Social Darwinism.

        • blackbelt352@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          9 months ago

          Ants build large, elaborate and engineered structures and shape their environment to suit their needs by moving large quantities of earth, therefore ants are unnatural for not following the rules of nature and actively working to give themselves an evolutionary edge.

        • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          9 months ago

          If humans aren’t separate from nature, then anything humans create falls within “nature”. Humans aren’t the first species to create tools and create farms. Even art have been observed in other species.

          As far a “paying attention to the nature order”, I do have my concerns, but it has more to do with putting so much CO2 into the atmosphere that we cause runaway climate change. Not showing basic empathy to other humans is a departure from the “natural order”.

          The part of the brain that governs “Empathy” has been narrowed down to a region called “mirror neurons”. It causes us to see ourselves in people we’re observing. It’s also directly responsible for how we learn tool use. Monkey 1 sees Monkey 2 put stick into anthill to get food, so Monkey 1 also puts stick into anthill.

          • ogmios@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            9 months ago

            I think people are getting their wires crossed by bringing prior bias into this discussion here. While I do agree with what you have said here, my personal understanding of the argument for respecting the natural order comes from seeing people make decisions which will naturally lead to their own inability to survive/procreate, then getting mad at others for failing to respect those decisions.

            • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              9 months ago

              Define “Natural Order”. It’s often used to justify being shitty to other people by Social Darwinists/Libertarians/Manosphere types. If you use that term without elaborating exactly what you mean, you’ll get slotted into one of those types because that’s exactly what they do.

            • spujb@lemmy.cafe
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              9 months ago

              comes from seeing people

              who?

              make decisions

              what did they decide to do?

              which will naturally lead to their own inability to survive/procreate

              how so? you seem to have a lot of experience seeing these admittedly horrific sounding situations play out. i think we all would benefit from hearing what is going on so that we can save ourselves from a similar scenario!

      • ogmios@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        9 months ago

        In the broadest sense possible, the laws of physics and the world that is formed as a result.

        • blackbelt352@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          I’ll give you a little piece of advice, your argument is unconvincing without evidence.

          Any claim made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. And I’m seeing a lot of complaining about other people asking for evidence and not a lot of evidence actually being produced.

          • spujb@lemmy.cafe
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            but have you considered that asking for evidence makes you a sea lion 😔😔😔

                • blackbelt352@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  9 months ago

                  Huh, who would have thought that asking questions to get people to clarify their arguments and defend their positions and not to derail the conversation was sealioning? Ya learn something new every day!