Friday, February 29, 2008


Today, the conditioning we receive -- from our parents, from society, etc. has more impact on the success we have in finding a mate and replicating our genes than ever before. When our species was just starting out and we lived in tribes and what not, everyone in our tribe of 100-200 people would have received pretty much the same conditioning because everybody would know everybody and any information one person had would quickly travel to the rest of the tribe. Back then, the success we had of finding a mate would have had more to do with our physical strength (at least for men), which led to higher status in the tribe (the higher the status the more mates you would have). Today, however, there are many different facets of society in which our children are taught different values, facts about life, and beliefs depending on how and where they grew up. This is detrimental to those who grow up in poor urban areas and extremely beneficial to those who grow up in rich neighborhoods because rich kids are given values by their parents that encourage success and poor kids are given values from their family and neighborhood that encourage failure (Read Rich Dad Poor Dad). However, because status no longer has as much to do with physical strength as it does with the strength one has within himself and his ability to lead and learn, pretty much anybody can cultivate status (one's inner strength and ability to lead can be learned and developed) and thus cultivate their probability of mating. In other words, in today's society we have more control over our evolution than ever before and I wonder how this is going to pan out.


kdl63 said...

this is very interesting. i have not read Rich Dad Poor Dad, but I would like to see how it says that poor kids are given values from their family and neighborhood that encourage failure. I think there could be arguments either way on that topic.

Sterbenz said...

I agree, this is a very interesting point, but i would like to pose a question. The richer a couple is the less kids they seem to have, for example the average American family is around 2.5 or something. The lower the person is in society the more children they tend to have, but there are many factors that attribute to this like religion, culture, and such. So if the rich people teach better values of success then the poor people why are the roles not reversed. Why don't the better valued people attempting to outgrow the worse valued people in order to better the race?

christo said...

when i say they teach their kids better values.. i mean they teach values that promote success in business.. it has more to do with money and being a successful businessman than anything else...and why aren't the roles reversed?? i don't really see a connection -- it's not like people consciously go around and say "oh I am more successful than the majority of people so i'm going to try to have more kids than everyone else" -- if anything that would promote failure to their kids... the more kids you have the less time you will have to do the things that make peoplesuccessful