Timeline for What evolutionary explanations are there for death?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 7, 2020 at 5:55 | history | notice added | Chris♦ | Needs citation | |
| May 3, 2012 at 2:14 | comment | added | user4951 | +1 for effort. Flawed because it underestimate gene selfishness. | |
| Apr 6, 2012 at 14:29 | comment | added | Marta Cz-C | @nico Helping your relatives spread their genes is equal to spreading your own genes (if you multiply your effort in helping others by the percentage of consanguinity). That's what I mean but maybe I use wrong terminology. | |
| Apr 6, 2012 at 10:29 | comment | added | nico | @MartaCz-C: sure, but my question is about "helping his own granchildren". The fact of helping them in no way means you are spreading your own genes. The fact of having granchildren means you spread your own genes in the past which... well is the purpose of reproduction. | |
| Apr 6, 2012 at 9:28 | comment | added | Marta Cz-C | @nico if person X have even 15 children but non of them have their own children through their lifespan, then genes of person X did not spread at all. One of measures of fitness is number of grandchildren. | |
| Apr 6, 2012 at 6:12 | comment | added | nico | @MartaCz-C: how does helping grandchildren spread genes? The only way for an old person to continue spreading his/her own gene is to have kids which would actually be bad. | |
| Mar 21, 2012 at 6:41 | comment | added | Marta Cz-C | It's naive group-selection argument. Like "I'd sacrifice myself when I get old so that others could produce more children". But if one would live longer and help his own grandchildren - he would spread his genes better even if it would hurt the society. | |
| Mar 20, 2012 at 8:19 | history | answered | bobthejoe | CC BY-SA 3.0 |