Cultural and Biological Evolution

The cultural evolutions of humans are of far greater importance than the biological evolution that created us.  As was brought up, humans all have the capacity for language, but it our culture that divides us.  Humans are all genetically the same, but it could be said that every human being, or race, has the same potential as any other.  The greatest divide between races is the different cultures between us.  Some cultures, like the Native Americans or tribal Africans, are more spiritual and focus on a closer communion with nature.  Others, like the European culture, focused on dominating and controlling nature.  From here, we see that the more warmongering and conquestful and land-dominating became the major power on the planet.  Not to say that some cultures are wrong, just that the Western culture came to dominate the others.  The cultural background of the West probably gave an "evolutionary" advantage to Europeans that allowed them to dominate the world.

Human-directed Evolution

Humans have gotten to the point where we can direct and control our own evolution.  Eugenics has been one of the earliest ways of directing  our own evolution, but is a great invasion of people's privacy and their bodies, as these programs are usually done against their will.  Advances in genetics have opened up the possibility of genetically engineering developing fetuses for better traits, or curing autism.  However, genetic engineering is a new field with every little knowledge or experience compared to other practical applications of biology.  On top of that, we hardly understand our own genes; millions of sequences' purpose is unknown to us, even after we have decoded our gnome.  However both eugenics and genetic engineering carry grave risks, as we did not fully understand what we are doing.    

In another order of science, robotics and prosthetics have come a long way, to the point where crippled human beings can replace missing limbs and digits with new artificial ones.  However we still cannot create artificial limbs that are as flexible or dexterous as our natural limbs are.  Still they will come a moment where the machine will surpass us in everywhere and robotic augments might only be available to those with money or influence.  

On all of the above mentioned methods to control our own evolution, we have clearly separated us from natural selection, but we might be unleashing the beast within us if we explore our evolutionary potential when we as a race may not be able to control the rapid change.  And like the biological evolution that preceded us, a new race of humans will have to compete with the old race.  And that could be some class warfare that even Marx could foresee.

Q&A: Does evolution still apply to humans today?

Many social Darwinists hold the belief that evolution still exists in our society.  Evolution, I believe has only a minimal effect on humans today.  Evolution, more or less, works on a species to create those best suited to gathering and obtaining resources.  Humans, having become experts in hunting, and more importantly, masters of agriculture, have little or no need to compete for basic needs like our tribal ancestors had needed.  Humans are not going to be selected unless some bizarre apocalypse takes place, like deadly poison ivy cover the planet, and only those humans who have a genetic immunity to poison ivy would survive.  Also, "useless" traits of humans would not evolve away.  Pinkies and small toes, being considered useless in our current environment, would not gradually evolve out of the humans since they are disadvantageous to surviving and procreating, so they wouldn't suddenly cease to be a part of us.

Q&A: Will people naturally select themselves?

People have been concerned that humans might be the cause of their own extinction.  It has serious merit, considering the mass amounts of nuclear weapons in the world and the growing number of nuclear armed states in the world.  Humans have gotten to the point where our intelligence surpasses our wisdom on controlling weapons of mass destruction.  Humans have been able to control themselves when they developed chemical weapons and thus far have been able to control the use of nuclear weapons.  It is possible that a rouge, irrational state gets control of a nuclear weapon or weapons and sets off a violent chain of events.  It is even possible that humans will develop and master the use of biological weapons which could be a even graver threat to humanity’s survival than nuclear or chemical weapons have ever been.  I gave humanity the benefit of the doubt that they won’t kill themselves, just as they had done before.  Hopefully the next generation of rulers won’t be bothered with the small short-sightedness and prejudices that lead to the deployment of huge amounts of weapons of mass destruction.

Money equals Freedom and Happiness

There is the common saying that money can't buy happiness.  Well maybe it can help bring happiness.  In our modern society, the freest individuals are those who are monetarily successful.  They have a  disproportional share in how our government and country should be run.  People on lower economic rungs have to follow their laws without the same fair share in shaping them.  So money can buy freedom, and part of obtaining freedom is being able to meet your needs.  Since all basic human needs can be meet with money, money is a need.  Freedom comes from money in our society and that means that some people can find their own happiness while others are too poor to obtain their needs and therefore earn a degree of freedom to do what they please.

Self, Society, and Freedom

Although humans are social animals, perhaps the greatest limitation to each individual’s freedom is each other.  We are constantly thinking about how other people will judge us if wear a certain pair of clothes or perform some action out in public.  We’re also affected by peer pressure.  People often give into the will of others over their own at the constant urging of other people.  In many respects, ‘hell is other people.’  Even when we are alone, our minds still think about others would think if they ever found out.  Much of who we are and what we think are defined by society.  Would we still have racism and sexism if we grew up in a vacuum?  While we are constantly afraid of what others think of us, we require social interaction, else we would go crazy.  Solitude would became its only hell soon enough.  

Q&A: How does Existentialism and Marxism coexist with each other?

The two philosophies of Existentialism and Marxism seem to contradict with each other.  One places an importance on the individual and his/her freedom and the other stresses the importance of the group and their place in history.  While it appears that that two cannot coexist, there is actually a overlap of the two philosophies.  Existentialism wants the most freedom for the individual, and Marxism wants the most freedom for the masses.  In a Marxist society, both goals could be met.  A person's private freedom does not have to infringe upon the private freedoms of others.
Of course, young Sartre's radical freedom is at odds with Marxism, as is other existentialist philosophers. Some of the ideas behind existentialism like the idea that life has no meaning can push people to focus on this life and its ills and not to reach for an afterlife that has no empirical evidence for.  Authenticity is a common theme in both philosophies; Marxism wants people to work as how they want to and existentialists want people to be true to themselves.  Both ideologies have some common ground and both could easily mix if they were willing to flex a bit for the other.