Skip to main content

High end products of human sexual selection, and how they provide diversity

We might think things such as laptops and bikinis are simply the result of human intelligence, but they are not. Human intelligence enables these things to be made, but that is true for toilet rolls and portable toilets, too. The difference is that some things are made to be better than anything else, and to gain popular support. Yes, they do have nice-smelling toilet rolls with Winnie the Pooh sketched on them, but what I am talking about are big, industrial productions of artificial things which are highly selected. This can be seen in the competition for smartphone dominance between iPhone and Android for example, or in the fashion industry between all the big names.

What makes an item better than another? Its suitability to the environment and likelihood to succeed. Put simply, the same things which make some species dominate a habitat, and some individuals outperform others. And of course, the drive behind selecting which traits are thought best, is the same, Sexual Selection. Why sexual? Because these traits are merely bets, just like Apple bet that people needed what they never knew they did: such thing as an "iPad". People often select things without enough evidence they will succeed or not, and that is what sexual selection is all about. To a teenager, perhaps, a style of clothing may bring them friends or dates, but on the other hand it might make them a loser. If such things were easy to predict, selection wouldn't even be needed, and that would reduce diversity which renders a species more vulnerable to unforeseeable selection pressures of the future.

For example, if all humans were to decide that Buddhism is the best religion, and all live the same lifestyle, future selection pressures that would go against Buddhism e.g. require war with armies and guns, would be overwhelming. So as they say, people don't put all their eggs in the same basket. But we do so without realising.

The manufacturing of such diverse objects satisfies our inner drive to strive for whatever we think is best, and to be able to select it. The selection tool in this case is either building these things, or purchasing them. Someone who hates Apple will not work for them, but instead will help their competitor, Windows Phone. As the saying goes, the enemy of my enemy is my friend. The product must adapt to its environment, so the reason some have touch screens is because people use their fingers to manipulate things. The reason behind a rail application is that people travel frequently. Apps which correctly predict the most popular needs (information, entertainment, organising, etc) are the most successful, just like features which are best adapted to the environment become dominant, for example the ability to use complex language to communicate.

Also, the sheer satisfaction, or addiction, of some people when they shop for clothes is linked to being in control (perhaps as a result of losing control of some other aspect in life), and being able to make personal selection decisions. Those who don't enjoy clothes shopping may place their bets when selecting their next smartphone or laptop, furniture, holidays and so on.

Yet this drive, the sex drive, shows a significant development during the teenage years, and stems from childhood which can have an impact on the direction it leads to. The reason behind children being perceived as "innocent" is the subconscious thought that children cannot select anything innately, and that outside influence will determine their outcome. After all, if this weren't true, then why would parents impose their own selections on their children, as if they are blank canvases? Maybe they are; find out more in the next post, Sexual Selection in Children and Teenagers.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

4 Reasons Google's Calico Won't "Solve Death"

The on-line world has been taken ablaze by Calico's bid to end ageing, and thus death itself, but is this what they will actually focus on, and will they achieve it? The fact is ageing will be reversed, and death by "natural causes" will go with it. The questions are "When?" and "By whom?". Until recently, not a lot was known about the approach Calico would take in this venture dubbed "moonshot thinking" - a term touted by Google as the source of all considerable human progress throughout history. This we don't doubt, but is this what Calico is all about? CNN's Dan Primack has revealed details about Calico's plan , which hint at a less-than-moonshot thinking approach, and cast a serious question mark on its ability to deliver the punchy TIME headline. Here is why: 1. The man with the idea, Bill Maris, arrived at the conclusion that the root of all death-causing disease is simply ageing itself. Not only is this widely

First Blog, Ever.

Before we start to explore evolution, let me outline what this blog is about, and what approaches it will take. Most people are aware of the theory of evolution. However, the predominant context of it has been restricted to the animal kingdom, and the most obvious animal of all has been ommitted: you, the human. Us, Homo sapiens. Articles of so-called "evolutionary psychology" may jump up in your head right now. Something about the colours women wear, or the jobs men want. Something about sex, something about money. Something silly. This blog aims to explore the fundamental principles of life and evolution, and apply them to the surrounding world, with an emphasis on humans. This blog aims to challenge evolutionary psychology with evolutionary biology. This blog aims to cast light on many dark areas such as: What is the cause, course and effect of life? Are there principles which apply to all forms of life, on Earth and other places in the Universe? Can we predict life fo

The evolution of the human body

In order to be able to look at ourselves in the mirror and be able to answer the question "Why do I look like this?", we must look back to our ancestry and their lifestyle, over a very long period of time. For the purpose of this analysis, let's look at the human versus the neanderthal. Recently there have been found neanderthal genes within the human gene pool, but the two species are different enough to compare, yet not too different (human versus fly would be too different). As you can see, the construction of the human pelvis and toes is different, and the human has less hair. This results in humans being able to run easily for long distances, in the detriment of short-distance running which we are worse at. We sweat better, so we can do more long-term effort. This feat is essential to better settlements, as we can discover a larger area with potentially better resources. It might seem counterproductive to not be able to run quickly for a short period, when it come