Main Page Contact Register Log In


Any kind of serious evolutionary adaptation is likely to come up with some downsides. For example for conditions like autisms the negatives might be first noticed and then a more balanced negatives and positives view reached. If we start culling deviations from expectation too soon we don't see any kind of exploration in the feature space to get to bloom, we get a serious local optimum problem where even the tiniest of setbacks disallows checking whether there is a huge mountain of competence right over it.

For example for a society it would be good to have certain amount of the blood group O+ but then parents might want to favour AB to maximize survival likelyhood in the event of an accident. There is already population skew in china regarding gender that has significant societal effects. Can parents or state have too much say in a persons makeup?






Any kind of serious evolutionary adaptation is likely to come up with some downsides.

This statement might be a bit too general. For example, what if we could avoid homozygous allele combination that leads to the sickle-cell anemia? In nature, the allele that leads to the sickness persists in the gene pool because it confers advantage in the heterozygous state. Now, if we could combine the alleles non-randomly we might get the benefits without the downsides.

Also, some features that used to be downside for humans even just a few hundred years ago (like increased calorie consumption by our brains compared to other primates) are no longer detrimental.
69%
melian
stars0
Replies (0)