the elephant in the election

[Durango 95]

Mental health is entirely subjective, and not something evolution is concerned with. If a populace is better able to utilize its resources and out compete its rivals, every one of them could be bats it crazy and evo doesn't care. In fact, I can make a very convincing argument that personality disorders are primarily vestigial remnants of evolutionary drives.
     Besides, humanity moved beyond individual evolutionary concerns with the invention of religion and then governments. This created large groups that function as a single super-organism. It is not necessary that an individual's role in society offer him perceived "happiness," it is only necessary that the defined role offer the larger group a competitive advantage against its rivals. It will then be in the interest of the group to continue producing such individuals, regardless of their mental state.

In the mean time it's essential to productivity that the species thrives and doesn't self destruct which requires some degree of peaceful coexistence. In the interest of the species there must be balance struck. I would also argue that what you say religion and government has taken away is still something we all maintain inside.

[Dolorous Jason]

Mental health is entirely subjective, and not something evolution is concerned with. If a populace is better able to utilize its resources and out compete its rivals, every one of them could be bats it crazy and evo doesn't care. In fact, I can make a very convincing argument that personality disorders are primarily vestigial remnants of evolutionary drives.
     Besides, humanity moved beyond individual evolutionary concerns with the invention of religion and then governments. This created large groups that function as a single super-organism. It is not necessary that an individual's role in society offer him perceived "happiness," it is only necessary that the defined role offer the larger group a competitive advantage against its rivals. It will then be in the interest of the group to continue producing such individuals, regardless of their mental state.

In the mean time it's essential to productivity that the species thrives and doesn't self destruct which requires some degree of peaceful coexistence. In the interest of the species there must be balance struck. I would also argue that what you say religion and government has taken away is still something we all maintain inside.

What the hell are you talking about ?

Humans have never peacfully coexisted . We are quarrelsome and territorial and tribal by our very nature.  If we all look the same we will find other ways to divide ourselves into groups - be it geography, beliefs , etc. We thrive despite these flaws because of our large brains , opposable thumbs , and our enjoyment of reproducing . It's really as simple as that . If it wasn't we'd have gone extinct 1,000's of years ago.

[Chief Joseph]

I'd be more inclined to say we survived because of them, not despite them. Which means they're not really flaws at all. Only when viewed through the temporary lens of current society do they become flaws. But the Europeans wouldn't have been able to settle this country without a whole lot of people who would be considered mentally unhealthy by today's standards. On an evolutionary scale, that was but a few moments ago.

Men have been butchering each other for as long as they have existed. You can now say that there was something mentally wrong with them by your subjective standards, but keep in mind that you're descended from the survivors. Personally, I'm going to have to go with Mother Nature's methods as being more successful than man's social engineering. In fact, anything man conceives of must fit within the preexisting framework of evolution or it will fail.

[Dolorous Jason]

I'd be more inclined to say we survived because of them, not despite them. Which means they're not really flaws at all. Only when viewed through the temporary lens of current society do they become flaws. But the Europeans wouldn't have been able to settle this country without a whole lot of people who would be considered mentally unhealthy by today's standards.

Men have been butchering each other for as long as they have existed. You can now say that there was something mentally wrong with them by your subjective standards, but keep in mind that you're descended from the survivors. Personally, I'm going to have to go with Mother Nature's methods as being more successful than man's social engineering. In fact, anything man conceives of must fit within the preexisting framework of evolution or it will fail.

true.

[Durango 95]

I'd be more inclined to say we survived because of them, not despite them. Which means they're not really flaws at all. Only when viewed through the temporary lens of current society do they become flaws. But the Europeans wouldn't have been able to settle this country without a whole lot of people who would be considered mentally unhealthy by today's standards. On an evolutionary scale, that was but a few moments ago.

Men have been butchering each other for as long as they have existed. You can now say that there was something mentally wrong with them by your subjective standards, but keep in mind that you're descended from the survivors. Personally, I'm going to have to go with Mother Nature's methods as being more successful than man's social engineering. In fact, anything man conceives of must fit within the preexisting framework of evolution or it will fail.

How does this relate to either multictultralism and or racism?

For that matter how does any of this relate to your point about the adverse effects of race assimilation?

Not sure where your taking this.

[Chief Joseph]

You said "Maximum genetic diversity would result in greater physical & mental health of the species?" and I was addressing that misunderstanding.

[Chief Joseph]

Maximum genetic diversity offers any gene pool increased chances of overcoming whatever challenges it may face. "Assimilation," as you are phrasing it, decreases genetic diversity and thus gives that specific gene pool a lowered chance of survival.

[Durango 95]

So is it your opinion that whatever gains (if any) that may come through racial assimilation as it relates to racial animus would be a net loss relative to genetic diversity?

[Chief Joseph]

Diversity requires both assimilation and segregation. Assimilation alone causes a decrease in diversity, while segregation causes stagnation at best. Only in combination do they increase diversity.

Baskin-Robbins never could have got to however many flavors they have now if they had taken an old flavor off the menu every time they added a new one, or if they had just kept combining flavors until only one was left.

[CBWx2]

So we need both racists and race traitors to keep the human race strong. Both working unknowingly towards a common goal. It's almost poetic.

[Chief Joseph]

I wouldn't phrase it that way at the PC rally.

[Durango 95]

Haha!

This is precisely the reason why I was trying clarify because it was obvious what was sure to follow.....

[wreck ship]

All I know is my next wife is gonna be brazilian. I'm progressive.

[wreck ship]

[wreck ship]