Be civil and follow principle of charity in the comments.

  • SorteKanin@feddit.dk
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 hours ago

    Evolution did not code us to avoid wood chips. There’s no “wood chip aversion” gene. It coded us to seek out potato chips.

    Again, I just think this is completely wrong. Evolution definitely does not only code us to go towards things we want, it also codes us to avoid harmful things. Evolution optimizes on all fronts at once.

    We risk mischaracterizing the nature of evolutionary forces by assigning to it a level of forethought it does not have.

    Evolution is a concept so obviously it doesn’t have forethought, but it doesn’t need that forethought to still evolve in a given direction. Natural selection drives evolution to whatever is preferable - if that includes an aversion to incest, then natural selection will select for that trait, given enough time.

    So the whole point I am making is that aversion towards incest is not rooted in primary drives but rather in the socio-primate drives.

    What evidence or arguments do you have for this? Aside from what you’ve presented already, as that has not been convincing. My explanation seems consistent and simpler and occams razor would prefer it.