Survival Of The Fittest Philosophy Essay

In the current essay we will review the survival of the fitters, different issues and theories connected with it. Survival of the Fittest – is the aphorism, introduced by Herbert Spencer and Darwin said in “Origin of Species” (1859) as the main factor of the theory of natural selection. This theory states: (A) reproduction in any species implies a certain degree of natural variations in results; (B) Any change that increases the survival ability of some members of the species with respect to the other, deprived of such changes could positively selected for reproduction capabilities; (C) the millennia, this process led to the development of complex organisms from simple and to the great diversification of the small number of initial organisms. The concept of “survival of the fittest” in sociology has described a few cases of apparent consumption, except for Social Darwinism. 

The chapter on natural selection overrides Darwin from that point on is: “Natural Selection, or The Survival of the Fittest.” Darwin was forced to take this step, since his work “On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection” directly exposed to allegations of massive appearance was in 1859, with the term “Natural Selection” is personified nature, as described in Charles Darwin Quotes: Scientific Theory. The decisive argument for the expanded terminology provided then Darwin’s supporters Alfred Russel Wallace, who wrote to Darwin, the term “Natural Selection”, which is actually a metaphorical expression for Herbert Spencer’s “Survival of the Fittest.” “Natural Selection” is therefore inappropriate, as in the evolution is not so much a beneficiary selection, rather than an elimination of unfavorable individuals occur. Darwin agreed with this criticism and took over the term. 

“Fit” or “fitness” describes in Darwin’s sense of the level of adaptation to the environment (the adaptive specialization), or the reproductive capacity despite low specialization, and not the physical strength and ability in terms of direct competitive displacement with the use of force. That is not the kind of live that defies all repressed and other species, but one which adapts to either the environment or manages to proliferate continuously in spite of adverse environmental conditions. On the criticality, the ambiguity and the potential for abuse of Spencer’s terminology – even in the original English language -. Darwin and Thomas Henry Huxley associate at an early stage of the discussion have indicated. Evolutionary biologists today avoid the term because its current idea of evolution does not adequately describe it. First, it suggests continuity in the evolution toward ever greater “fitness”. Today’s species would then be “fitter” than extinct, which is not the case. Secondly, it ignores the principle of sexual selection.

Herbert Spencer coined the term “Survival of the Fittest” in 1864 in his Principles of Biology” and brought him to the debate about Darwin’s book on the origin of species: 

“If … Individuals of a species … necessary in countless directions and degrees differ, must … then have to be always less exposed than some other of the risk among all individuals and that their balance by a special force acting … would be completely destroyed. … The inevitable result will be that those individuals whose functions differ most from the equilibrium with the modified aggregate external forces must be destroyed, while the other hand, will live those who are their functions closest to the equilibrium with the modified sets of external forces near.” This survival of the fittest … is the same as what Mr. Darwin understood as natural selection.” Sometimes, represented in the history of science literature view, Spencer had coined the “Survival of the Fittest” already in 1851 in his “Social Statics” or 1852 in his “Theory of population”, which is not correct in this form, as stated by Charles Darwin. Spencer took the concept here but not the term for the “Survival of the Fittest” in a political-sociological sense. The term “Survival of the Fittest”, he brought only in 1864 as described above in the “Principles of Biology” in the debate over Darwin’s Origin of Species, as described in Charles Darwin’s The Origin of Species.

Get Help With Your Essay

If you need assistance with writing your essay, our professional essay writing service is here to help!
Find out more about our Essay Writing Service

Generally speaking, “fittest” in the “fittest” is the inventor of the Spencer coined as a result of this struggle for the survival of individuals, in Darwin’s natural selection theory is naturally defined for each individual – the focus on being adaptable. You can directly observe the individual organism for which natural selection acts, whether a significant impact on survival is certainly lucky. The survival of the fittest takes place thousands of years – is a period of tens of thousands of years, “a generational change in mean thousands” are expected.  Creationists such as the objections to evolution “is a survivor of the fittest, the fittest survive,” say the claim cycle theory (or a tautology, tautology), and science are not to argue. However, this expression is a metaphor for a brief description of the mechanism, the theory does not prove anything. Biologists generally not use this expression, called natural selection. And natural selection is supported by the fact that the observed field work and experiments. 

The idea that species can change under the action of selection, different scholars have repeatedly expressed since ancient times, including some English writers beginning of the XIX century. However, widespread acceptance of the concept of natural selection was once in 1858 by British scientist Charles Darwin and Alfred Wallace presented in his articles published in the same issue of the Journal of the Proceedings of the Linnean Society of London. Zoology, the idea that wildlife is a mechanism, similar to artificial selection, and especially after the publication in 1859 of Darwin’s Origin of Species. Sense of their idea is that the emergence of successful creation of nature is not necessarily to understand and analyze the situation and can act at random. It is enough to create a wide variety of animals – and, ultimately, the fittest will survive. Currently, some naive views of Darwin himself turned out to be partially redesigned.Thus, Darwin imagined that the change should happen very smoothly, and the range of variation is continuous, as described in Darwin’s Theory Of Evolution. Today, however, the mechanisms of natural selection are explained by genetics, makes for some originality in this sense. Mutations in the genes that operate at the first stage of the process described above, are discrete changes in the genotype. Clearly, however, that the basic meaning of Darwin’s ideas remained unchanged. 

There are different classifications of forms of selection. Widely is used classification that is based on the nature of the effect of forms of selection on the variability of the trait in the population. Driving the selection – a form of natural selection, which operates in the directed change of environmental conditions, as described by Darwin and Wallace. In this case, individuals with symptoms that are deflected in a direction from the average, receive benefits. In this case, different variations of feature (its deviation in the opposite direction from the mean) are subjected to negative selection. As a result, in a population from generation to generation, a shift of the average character in a certain direction. The pressure driving the selection must meet the adaptive capabilities of the population and the rate of mutational change (otherwise the pressure of the environment can lead to extinction). 

Stabilizing selection – a form of natural selection, in which his action is directed against individuals with extreme deviations from the average, in favor of individuals with an average severity of the trait. There are described many examples of stabilizing selection in nature. For example, at first glance it seems that the greatest contribution to the gene pool of the next generation must make the individuals with the highest fertility. However, observations of natural populations of birds and mammals show that it is not that way. Selection in favor of mean values was found in a variety of symptoms. In mammals, newborns with very low and very high weight more likely to die at birth or during the first weeks of life than babies of average weight, as described in Darwin’s Quotes: Not Survival of the Fittest? 

Disruptive (tearing) selection – is a form of natural selection, where conditions are conducive to two or more extreme options (directions) of variation, but not conducive to an intermediate, average trait. As a result, you may receive several new forms from a single source. Darwin described the action of disruptive selection, considering that it lies at the heart of the divergence, though he could not give evidence of its existence in nature. Disruptive selection contributes to the emergence and maintenance of polymorphism in populations, and in some cases can cause speciation. 

One of the possible situations in nature, which comes into effect disruptive selection – is when the polymorphic population is heterogeneous habitat. The different forms are adapted to different ecological niches or subnishes. 

Survival of organisms is important, but not the only component of natural selection exists. Another important component is attractive to individuals of the opposite sex. Darwin called this phenomenon of sexual selection: “This form of selection is determined not by the struggle for existence in the relations of organic beings to each other or with external conditions, but the rivalry between individuals of one sex, usually males, for the possession of individuals of the opposite sex.” Sexual selection is a natural selection for success in breeding. Features that reduce the viability of their carriers, may occur and spread, if the benefits that they provide a breeding success is much higher than their weaknesses to survive. It was suggested that there are two main hypotheses about the mechanisms of sexual selection. According to the hypothesis of “good genes” and female “reasons” as follows: “If the male, despite its bright plumage and long tail, somehow managed not to die at the hands of predators and survive to sexual maturity, then, consequently, he has good genes, which allowed him to do it. Hence, he should be chosen as a father to his children: he will give them his good genes.” Choosing bright males, females choose good genes for their offspring, as described by Michael Heeney.

According to the hypothesis of “attractive sons,” the logic of the choice of females is somewhat different. If males are bright, for whatever reasons, they are attractive to females, you should choose a bright future for your sons, because sons will inherit the genes of bright colors and will be attractive to females in the next generation. Thus, a positive feedback loop that leads to the fact that generation after generation of bright plumage of males is increasingly growing. The process goes on increasing until it reaches the limit of viability. In the choice of mating females is no more and no less logical than the rest of their behavior. When the animal feels thirsty, it is not a reason for him to drink water in order to restore fluid and electrolyte balance in the body – he is going to drink because he feels thirsty. Likewise, the females choose bright males, they follow their instincts – they like the bright tails. All those who instinct other behavior, all they have left no progeny. Thus, we have not discussed the logic of the females, and the logic of the struggle for existence and natural selection – is a blind and automatic process, which, acting continuously from generation to generation, and formed all the amazing variety of shapes, colors and instincts, which we observe in the world of wildlife . 

Positive selection – a form of natural selection. Its effect is the opposite of truncation selection. Positive selection increases the number of individuals in the population, with useful features that increase the viability of the species as a whole. Truncation selection – is a form of natural selection. Its effect is the opposite of positive selection. Truncation selection is discarded from the population, the vast majority of individuals carrying signs, dramatically reduce the viability under these environmental conditions. 

Survival of the fittest is in terms of species and populations, such as species having gills in the water, because fit can win the fight for survival. There are survival bodied organisms, survival of the physically strongest of organisms as physical struggle for resources is an integral part of life. Survival of the most sexually successful organisms happens because sexual reproduction is the dominant mode of reproduction. In this case, it takes sexual selection. However, all these cases are private, but mostly remains successful preservation time. So sometimes these areas are violated for the sake of following the main goal, as stated in Survival of the fittest. 

Charles Darwin believed that natural selection is a fundamental factor in the evolution of life. Accumulation in the late XIX – early XX century, information on genetics, in particular the discovery of the discrete nature of the inheritance of phenotypic traits, prompted many researchers to revise the thesis of Darwin: as critical factors of evolution were considered mutation genotype. On the other hand, the discovery of the known correlations among the traits of related species led to the formulation of hypotheses about the evolution on the basis of laws and not random variability. Discussion of the role of various factors in the evolution continues today, and evolutionary biology came to the need for his next, the third synthesis. As a dact, Darwin long hesitated to publish his theory, as seen the problem of ants, which can be explained only in terms of genetics, as stated in Survival of the fittest.

Survival of the fittest is the main driving force of evolution of living organisms. Thinking about the existence of natural selection came independently and almost simultaneously to several English naturalists: V. Wells (1813), P. Mathews (1831), E. Blythe (1835, 1837), A. Wallace (1858), Darwin (1858, 1859), but only Darwin was able to discover the significance of this phenomenon as the main factor of evolution and created the theory of natural selection. Unlike human- artificial selection, natural selection is due to effects on organisms of the environment. According to Darwin, natural selection – is “the experience of the fittest” organisms, which resulted on the basis of uncertain genetic variation in the number of generations takes evolution. 

In general, we can say that natural selection is daily and hourly throughout the world investigating minute changes, rejecting the bad, preserving and pondered them good, working silently and invisibly, wherever and whenever they are neither presented in this case, on the improvement of each organic being in connection with the conditions of his life, organic and inorganic. Man does not see these slowly make changes in their movement forward and time to just ignore diversity of contemporary forms of life once existed. 

Although natural selection can only operate for the benefit of the organism and the only effect of this benefit, however the signs and structures, which seem to be quite insignificant, may enter into the terms of the selection process. When the insects that feed on leaves, green, and eating the bark – spotty – gray, alpine ptarmigan white in winter, and the red grouse is painted the color of heather, we must assume that these stains are beneficial to these birds and insects, protecting them from danger. Considering these differences between species that seem insignificant, one must not forget that they are directly influenced by climate, food, etc. Also, the force of law correlations should be noted that when one part varies and changes accumulate by natural selection, there are other changes, often the most unexpected properties, as described in Survival of the fittest. 

If the changes that occur under domestication, in a certain period of life, tend to occur in the offspring in the same period – even in the natural state, natural selection will act on the organisms and modify them at any age through favorable changes in this age group and by their inheritance in the corresponding same age. Natural selection may modify and adapt the larva of an insect to numerous conditions, quite different from those in which the adult insect lives, and these changes in the force of law correlations may impact on the adult form. Similarly, and vice versa: changes in adult insects may affect the structure of the larvae, but in any case, natural selection will ensure their safety, because otherwise having them exposed to the extinction of species. Natural selection changes the structure of relatively young parents and parents that are relatively young. In social animals, it adapts the structure of each individual to the needs of the community, if only to make the community benefit from this change in the selection of exposed individuals. 

In order to clarify the action of natural selection, it is sufficient to provide one or two imaginary examples. Let us consider the example of the wolf, feeding on different animals and one beset by force, and other tricks, the third-speed, imagine that the fastest prey, deer, for example, have increased in number by which any changes that have occurred in the area, or whether another production decreased in particular, just at the time of year when wolves suffer the most from lack of food. In such circumstances, the fastest and lean wolves will have a better chance to survive and, thus, remain or be selected. You can give another more complicated example, illustrating the mode of action of natural selection. Insects in search of nectar and pollen will crumble very often will move her from flower to flower. So by going to cross between the flowers, belonging to two different individuals, and this process will give rise to cross over the mighty seedlings, consequently will have the best chance for prosperity and survival. Plants that produce flowers with the nectaries, select the largest amount of nectar, insects will visit more often and more frequently subjected to cross-breeding and, eventually, will overcome their rivals, and form a local variety. One can imagine another case: insects visiting the flowers to collect nectar is not, and pollen, and as pollen is used exclusively for fertilization, then its destruction should be, it would seem to bring only damage to the plant, however, if a little pollen, first accidentally and then permanently tolerated eating insects pollen from flower to flower, and this would be achieved by cross-breeding, at least nine-tenths of the pollen being destroyed, this kind of robbery would be quite beneficial to plants, and individuals that produce more and more pollen and fitted with larger anthers, would be subjected to selection. Thus, the examples can be seen in the fact that natural selection operates only through the preservation and accumulation of small inherited modifications, each of which is advantageous for saving the creatures. 

Much of the variability, of course, and individual differences are likely to be a favorable circumstance. A large number of individuals are increasing the chances of a given period of useful changes, can compensate for a lesser degree of variation in individual animal and it is an important element of success. Hybridization plays an important role in nature, as it supports uniformity and consistency traits in individuals of the same species or same species.  Length of time in itself does not promote or impede natural selection. The length of time is important, as it increases the chances of favorable changes in their selection, accumulation and retention. 

Extinction is caused by natural selection. This issue should be mentioned because of its close connection with natural selection. Natural selection acts only through the changes, in some sense useful, and therefore root. Because of the rapid increase in the number of all organic beings exponentially, each area is already filled to the limit of the inhabitants, and from this it follows that, as the favored form will increase in number, the less favorable treatment will usually decrease in numbers and become rare. The rarity of forms – is a forerunner of extinction. Any form submitted by a small number of individuals has a better chance at the final extinction, due to a significant climatic fluctuations during the year or due to a temporary increase in the number of its enemies. Species, most wealthy individuals, have the greatest chance for the appearance at any given period of favorable changes. Hence, rare species at any given time will change and evolve more slowly and therefore will be defeated in the battle of life change and improve the descendants of the more common species. From this it follows that, since over time the activities of natural selection, the formation of new species, while others have become increasingly rare, finally disappear. 

Sometimes it is difficult to explain the people’s behavior, as people hurt one another, which, for example, you will never see among animals. You don’t see wild animals killing animals of the same species, yet people do it all the time. Often people behave in a strange way, and the laws of “animal kingdom” do not apply. Also, prisoners and people on life support can be compared, as the examples of the consequences of the survival of the fittest. Nature has its laws and sometimes people can not control them. True that people have discovered many types of medicine that help people to survive and often save lives. The survival of the fittest can now be controlled in some way.

Nature has its rhythm and whatever people do does not change a lot in the world, as nature is more powerful than we think. Some people survive, some people die, but the tendency is that the number of people is constantly growing. However, some people believe that the laws of nature determine everything. It can be said that the Earth is a living organism and people can not interfere in its life. Some people and philosophers even think that people do not have to cure each other, as there is the survival of the fittest that determines everything.