It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Selfish little cells

page: 1

log in


posted on Aug, 20 2003 @ 07:23 PM
I'd rather believe in a religion, no matter how illogical, than accept that the only reason I exist is to reproduce and propagate my genes.

A situation where the sum is greater than the parts is known as synergy, and human beings are 'synergious' in that we are able to reason logically and are possessed with a consciousness.

The Selfish Gene Theory. Are we driven by base desires
we don't want to accept? What are your thoughts?

posted on Aug, 20 2003 @ 07:32 PM
My first thought is that it could possibly be the ultimate blame-game. Think about it. You can remain PC and not blame anybody else (including spiritual entities)...but especially not yourself. You're just an ugly bag of mostly water carrying around a bunch of conniving cells.

posted on Aug, 20 2003 @ 07:40 PM
I don't mind Stephen Pinker as an evolutionary theorist, although he is altogether anecdotal in his mainstream literature.

This is a really simple question. It's just "What is the purpose of life?" It has been answered many times by all manner of experts at ATS.

From the article (near the start).....

Every creature, in the long-run, acts to maximize the number of descendants. Any creature which does not act this way will eventually be out-bred by those who do. While a creature may have enough for its own needs the number of descendants it can have is bounded only by the resources around it. Hence creatures are generally insatiable.

This may seem wrong for humans, who have free will and are not mere programmable automaton, in fact humans make logical decisions to satisfy their emotions, and human emotions are as murky and as illogical as any of those found in their animal counterparts.

Two things are wrong.

1. Overpopulation is not good for the species as the species is better at destroying its habitat than anyone else, in the aid of a corrupt fast buck. (Although, in a more global sense, it means homo sapiens will be outbred and survived by more efficient species).

2. Some level of free will is assumed here rather than programming. Most people think they have free will but they have no free will at all.

new topics

log in