From an evolution standpoint, what was the point of having people around who were not inclined to have offspring? There must be some good, and fairly subtle, reason for it.
The only thing he could work out was that it was groups of people—societies—rather than individual creatures, who were now trying to out-reproduce and/or kill each other, and that, in a society, there was plenty of room for someone who didn’t have kids as long as he was up to something useful.
The only thing he could work out was that it was groups of people—societies—rather than individual creatures, who were now trying to out-reproduce and/or kill each other, and that, in a society, there was plenty of room for someone who didn’t have kids as long as he was up to something useful.
There is no evolutionary standpoint here though, so there's a lot of things that don't make sense from evolutionary standpoint. Creatures not procreating do not exist from an evolutionary standpoint — it's a dynamic, not a result in any given point of time. Well, ok, there's one point to not procreating: dying and getting one's genes from society gene pool. Generally it makes the rest (genes or creatures, take your pick) more adapted to the situation.
unavailable
fb2epub
Drag & drop your files
(not more than 5 at once)