Re: Cooperation Is Not Altruism It Is Mutualism


"John Edser" <edser@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:e5kkbm$1248$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
JE:-
JE:-
Without the only EMPIRICALLY REFUTABLE fitness that exists within
evolutionary theory, i.e. TDF (Total Darwinian Fitness defined as the
total
number of strictly fertile adult forms reproduced per parent per
population)
it becomes impossible to distinguish between mutualised cooperation and
altruism within gene centric evolutionary theory. This is because
"everything is relative" to just nothing stated by anybody! This being the
case it is impossible to distinguish between an investment for mutual but
not necessarily equal gain and a donation producing a loss for the donor
and
gain for the recipient. The consistent misuse of 100% relative arguments
within evolutionary theory has allowed just about any cost to be written
off
as a donation, even a cost which provides a total gain for the supposed
"altruist". This fixes altruism within nature as just an irrefutable
proposition. It appears that the level of intellectual bankruptcy is so
extensive that most think this is a "good" thing for evolutionary science
and not just a fatal flaw.


John Edser
Independent Researcher

edser@xxxxxxxxxx

How about this example for you: Let's say a species of cat has a genetic
propensity for the males to kill the existing litter of a female, so he can
breed with her and propagate his own genes. This continues until all the
males exhibit this trait, and eventually, very few of the young survive,
thinning the population, until a bad season wipes out the last remaining
survivors.

A neighboring population, which has no such infanticide trait, invades the
area, taking over, and fully displaces the former population, which has
become extinct.

It's really very simple how group traits evolve through natural selection.
A true scientist does not choose his conclusion first, and then cherry-pick
only that evidence which supports it.


.

Loading