Wednesday, February 23, 2011

Darwin v. The Perfect World

Who should survive? The "fittest," as per Darwin - or everybody?

Just think for a minute. What if everybody survives; not just the "fittest." Imagine, cancer under control, no more heart disease, no more diabetes, no more fatal illness. Then there's always organ replacements in case of accidents, deterioration or non-function, etc. Not to mention cosmetic surgery for that everlasting look of youth and fitness. No more hunger, no more poverty! And ultimately, once we discover the molecular genetics of the aging process - no more getting older! Older in "real years", but not in "human years." Imagine - youthful function with youthful looks (you decide what "youth" mean to you) into your once-called "senior years." Age, as we know it, will become irrelevant! Ah Utopia!!

It's coming. No illness, limited tragedy, a true chance for survival for all - fit or unfit. Its what we all want. Or is it?

Well, maybe we'll still have adversities of one sort or another that will be out of our control - climate issues, earthquakes, asteroid bombardment and similar uncontrollable events - including, of course, human-engineered devastation. We may yet approach substituting the "survival of the fittest" dictum by the new "survival of everybody", but will it be mitigated by the natural aggression that is a piece of who we are?

We may all long for this Utopian world, but won't our reach for this "heaven on earth" always be exceeded by our naturally limited grasp? Isn't it a fact that even in our man-made Utopia, the "survival of the fittest" struggle will continue. We all can't have everything we want. We will remain primarily natural aggressive takers rather than tranquil givers or sharers. It's who we are. The Gordon Gekkos of the world will trump the Mother Teresas. But in the end, is that so bad? Darwin will prevail.

Or will he?

No comments: