There is much evidence which suggests Darwin’s theory does not fit today’s fully modern human being. For example during our ancestors primitive period animal fat and sugar was highly nutritious especially since it was scarce. Finding these nutrients were challenging as an individual would have the option of killing an animal or scavenging one already been killed. To get fruit travelling or hunting would be the only options as both these were hard to find. For this reason strong desires would have been preserved in the genes by natural selection as our ancestors adapted to the environment. With those who had the strongest desires being more likely to find the food. This would not be a problem to our ancestors as the consumption of fat and sugar would be very low due to the resources being scarce, however today many people in the world are over eating in their consumption of fat and sugar, causing them major health problems. It then can be argued the strong gene passed on to offspring to desire these foods are no longer needed in the modern human as food is no longer as scarce as it was during our ancestors time. This is called an ‘environmental mismatch’ as we are now in an environment where these genes that make individuals have strong desires for these foods, which also come about through natural selection for survival purposes are now endangering lives of individuals who do not control their consumption. (Evan D and Zarate O 1999) Therefore it can be said that Darwin’s theory of natural selection and adaptation to the environment no longer applies to the fully modern human.
The natural selection theory suggests humans genes evolved and adapted to the environment in order to aid survival. This concept however does not explain the eating disorder anorexia which is when an individual deprives themselves from eating food as they believe they are too fat. It is believed people who suffer from this disorder may have higher levels of serotonin, a neurotransmitter which can lead to anorexia behaviour. Recent studies have shown there may be an increased risk in developing anorexia if a biological family member has had the condition, which implies there may be a genetic link. This disorder contradicts theory of evolution as it does not explain why a genetic disorder which causes one to eventually die will stay on in the gene pool as it in no way aids an individual’s survival (http://health.yahoo.com/). This is an example of how Darwin’s theory of adaptation no longer applies to humans today.
The evolutionary theory suggests our primitive ancestors began to form alliances in order to aid survival which is called reciprocal altruism. However this theory can be challenged by the concept of non-reciprocal altruism which is when an individual gives selflessly. For example a universally common form of non-reciprocal altruism is found within parenting. Research suggests human parents have the most intense and long-lasting relationship with their off-spring. This is claimed to be non-reciprocal as this does in no way aid the survival of the parent or benefit them. For this reason it can be argued Darwin theory contradicts the act of non-reciprocal altruism, and therefore reciprocal altruism no longer applies when tested against the parenting of a fully modern human. (Evan D and Zarate O 1999)
Natural selection is comprised of two main processes; these processes are called ‘Heredity’ and ‘Mutation’. The process of heredity is when off-spring inherits something from their parents or family lineage. The process of mutation is when an inherited process is not perfect, where by a gene inside one cell may just change. Darwin’s theory state when a new gene is born through mutation it’s survival onto the off-spring depends on whether or not the gene aids survival or reproduction in human existence. If it decreases the chance of survival it will not get passed onto offspring eventually dying in the gene pool. (Evan D and Zarate O 1999) There is much evidence which suggests Darwin’s theory still fits the modern human being. The process of natural selection is still evident in humans today for example the molecule disease sickle cell. The disease sickle cell occurs by a subtle error in the vast molecule structure of the haemoglobin. This causes the molecule to cluster together; bending the red blood cells inhabited creating sickle cell-shaped corpuscles. The disease causes joint and abdominal pain including a variety of clinical problems. During the early study of this disease people with sickle cell disease became case studies for emerging questions in fields that specialise in evolutionary biology. The module disease became more visual and noteworthy, a test case for novel theories to do with biological inheritance. One new theory suggested was that sickle cell trait began as a beneficial evolutionary protection against malaria. This coincides with the fact the disease mostly affects those of African descent as this is the place where malaria is mostly at large (Wailoo K 2001). Darwin’s natural selection theory suggests that mutations come about every now and then in gene’s and survive through generations if it helps aid the survival or reproductions of an individual. In relation to the disease sickle cell it can be argued it proves there is still existing evidence of genes adaptation in the environment to aid survival, therefore Darwin’s theory still applies.
Another theory in relation to natural selection is reciprocal altruism. The evolutionary theory suggests when our ancestors were living their primate lifestyle, group sizes began to increase. To then aid themselves in survival they then began to form alliances. This is called reciprocal altruism when favours are exchanged in return for favours. Theorist Marcel Mauss in his book ‘The gift’ discusses the concept of giving in cultures and societies. In his conclusion he found that societies have progressed in themselves as subgroups and individuals. This is due to them giving receiving and giving again in return. During his research he found that through giving people learn how to create mutual interests, satisfaction and defending themselves without resorting to arms. (Mauss M 2002) In relation to the reciprocal altruistic theory it can be argued it is still relevant due to the theory stating that natural selection and adaptation is embedded within our genes causing us to do things to aid our survival. In relation to reciprocal altruism and Marcel Mauss’s theory of the gift, reciprocal altruism is still relevant today as giving is a concept used globally for selfish interests used to aid an individual’s survival, therefore it can be argued Darwin theory on reciprocal altruism still applies.
Despite there being divisions in people’s perception on beauty, it has been established that through research evidence has increasingly emerged to show there are many aesthetic preferences that are both universal and innate. However preferences for symmetrical people are universal. It was found by psychologist Devendra Singh that while cultures vary in their preferred ideal weight for women, the universal idea waist-hip ratio is 0.7. This is thought to be the most attractive and is called the ‘hour glass figure’. It is theorised to be preferred as research shows that a 0.7 waist-hip ration in a woman is a good indicator of fertility (Evan D and Zarate O 1999). This is an example on how Darwin’s theory of natural selection is still evident today. The process of the survival of the fittest is evident in the desired ‘hour glass figure’ a pellucid example of when individuals seek those who have good genes In order to aid the survival of the offspring, therefore in relation to preferences of a waist-hip ratio, Darwin’s theory still applies.
Within this essay I have found a variety of evidence which suggests Darwin’s theory of evolution successfully applies to the fully modern human. For example adaptation in the genes is still evident today with heredity diseases such as sickle cell, which were believed to come about in order to protect the body against malaria. Darwin’s theory reciprocal altruism also suggests our ancestors began to form alliances when group numbers began to rise in order to aid survival. Theorist Marcel Mauss concept on the gift coincides with reciprocal altruism as he came to the conclusion that giving and receiving is a global interest which aids individual’s survival through satisfaction, defence and mutual interest. Research from Devendra Singh also coincides with Darwin’s theory on natural selection as Singh found in his research the universal waist-hip ratio is 0.7. This is found to be the most attractive as it is an indicator of fertility which coincides with natural selection when individuals seek those with good genes in order to aid survival in the off-spring. However Despite the previous evidence coinciding with Darwin’s theory the concluding argument suggests Darwin’s theory is no longer relevant in the fully modern human. For example the gene which causes individuals to have a strong desire for fat and sugar was once needed as our ancestors needed the desire for these nutrients for these foods were scarce. Those who had the strongest desires would be more successful in finding the food. However this is no longer needed in a fully modern human being as now individuals are endangering there health by over eating these foods. More evidence which do not coincide with Darwin’s theory is the eating disorder anorexia, which is believed to possibly be genetic as those who have biological relatives with the disorder are highly at risk. This disorder has no reason for adaptation and in no way aids the survival of an individual. The last evidence which does not agree with Darwin’s concept is non-reciprocal altruism, as this is an act which does not aid the individual, therefore making the act selfless which is in contrast to reciprocal altruism. Therefore the evidence from this argument strongly suggests Darwin’s account of human evolution in “The Descent of Man” does not fully hold up today and can be argued to often contradict itself in relation to the lives of individuals of today.
Reference:
Darwin, C. (1871) The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex. London
Evans, D. and Zarate, O. (2000) Introducing: Evolutionary Psychology. Icon Books ltd. Cambridge.
- accessed on 23rd February 2007
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Descent_of_Man,_and_Selection_in_Relation_to_Sex – accessed on 24th February 2007
Lewin, R. (2005) Human Evolution: An Illustrated Introduction 5th edition Blackwell. Harvard University
http://books.google.com/books?vid=ISBN1405103787&id=SopsLRo1QyUC&pg=PP1&lpg=PP1&ots=1NKp5yMhQ-&dq=an+illustrated+introduction+lewin&sig=bPGnkQ5ww_393WxBZt4kxRiKU-Q#PPA24,M1
Mauss, M. (2002) The Gift. Routledge. London.
Wailoo, K. (2001) Dying in the City of Blues. The University of North Carolina Press. USA
