None Hitwonder2d ago
When people talk about "survival of the fittest" or "the crime of empathy," I want clips like this to be pressed into the sides of those people's self-serving dumbfuck heads until they cave in.
Show threadUSS Joshua Norton, NCC-74819-B

@nonehitwonder This is literally survival of the fittest in action though. It's never about the individual, it's always about the group. The group that teaches the best habits benefit just as much as the group that perpetuates a beneficial mutation.

Compassion *is* a trait that benefits a population, otherwise we never would have developed it enough for it to survive generations. And we wouldn't see it in animal populations like this.

Jun 16 at 2:12amWeb
Show threadSci-Fi Girl2d ago

@USSJoshuaNorton @nonehitwonder

💯 this! For sure.

(but whenever I see a clip like this, I hear Vala in my head [Stargate] and laugh again at her hilariously wrong line ... "Because you are also a Tortoise"! 😂)

Show threadNone Hitwonder2d ago
@USSJoshuaNorton I completely agree, which makes it all the more infuriating when that phrase is misused to justify behavior that directly contradicts our best nature.
Show threadUSS Joshua Norton, NCC-74819-B2d ago
@nonehitwonder There are so many sayings that get twisted in this broken way. One of my favorites is "blood is thicker than water" used to justify abusive family dynamics. The whole phrase is "Blood of the covenant is thicker than water of the womb." and it literally means the opposite of what it's been twisted into — that connections forged in difficult circumstances and shared experiences are stronger than that of genetic relations.
Show threadDavid Mitchell 2d ago

@USSJoshuaNorton

“Am I my brother’s keeper?” to deny social responsibility.

In the original, Cain has murdered his brother in a fit of jealousy and attempts to deflect and hide his crime with the phrase.

@nonehitwonder

Show threadLawrence Miller2d ago
@DavidM_yeg @USSJoshuaNorton @nonehitwonder to pull oneself up by one's bootstraps was originally an example of something that is not possible, not some expression of rugged individualism
Show threadAaron V. Humphrey2d ago

@USSJoshuaNorton

This seems like it might be apocryphal. From Wikipedia:

Writing in the 1990s and 2000s, author Albert Jack and Messianic minister Richard Pustelniak, claim that the original meaning of the expression was that the ties between people who have made a blood covenant (or have shed blood together in battle) were stronger than ties formed by "the water of the womb", thus "The blood of the covenant is thicker than the water of the womb". Neither of the authors cites any sources to support his claim.

Show threadFandaSin1d ago

@USSJoshuaNorton

OMG. 🤯
Thank you! 👍
I now understand real meaning of that saying.
Because it's rarely used in that manner, most of the time one who says it means it in "family bond is stronger."

@nonehitwonder

Show threadLisa6h ago

@FandaSin Unfortunately it's not true; several of us have posted the correction in reply, but it seems that JoshuaNorton is muting us all.

"Blood is thicker than water" can be traced back several centuries to Scottish writings, and (without known connections) even further in German.

"The blood of the covenant" version can only be traced back to 1994, when an author claimed it to be the original version without citing any sources or references.

Show threadFandaSin5m ago

@TicklishHoneyBee

Thank you.👍

Show threadLisa1d ago

@USSJoshuaNorton From my understanding this isn't true; "blood is thicker than water" can be traced back through several hundred years of Scottish writings¹, while the "blood of the covenant" version can only be traced back to 1994² - where someone claimed it to be the 'original meaning' without citing any sources.

1. A Collection of Scots Proverbs by A. Ramsay, 1737 with later reprints

2. How Shall I Know? The Blood Covenant, by R. R. Pustelniak, 1994.

Show threadnicky1d ago
@USSJoshuaNorton @nonehitwonder I always took it to mean the family you make with your spouse becomes more important than your siblings. The blood of the covenant could mean marital bed blood or the blood that comes with a new child. The covenant being the marriage promise.
Show threadUSS Joshua Norton, NCC-74819-B1d ago

@skoombidoombis Absolutely. The original wording seems to invoke blood brothers from the battle field, but *any* family formed by choice requires so much commitment and work. Blood relations *can* also put that effort in, but my personal experience has been those using the quote to insist blood family over everything else don't usually put that work in.

@nonehitwonder

Show threadNullstring 🏴‍☠️1d ago
@USSJoshuaNorton @nonehitwonder yeah and the "bad apple" one for cops but then they never say "spoils the bunch" or "spare the rod" etc etc
Show threadDigitalTaoist #resists22h ago

@USSJoshuaNorton @nonehitwonder
That is informative! Thank you!!

In fact I was interested in the etymology of the phrase, after reading this, and apparently the first appearance of the phrase is the German Reinhart Fuchs/Reynard the Fox... anyway I will definitely bear this in mind the next time I hear the phrase misused 👍

Show threadJon A. Cruz2d ago

@USSJoshuaNorton @nonehitwonder that's why when Star Trek 2 came out, I immediately cited the flaw in Spock's logic.

It's the needs of the *whole* outweigh the needs of the few, or of the many.

Show threadXoli2d ago
@USSJoshuaNorton @nonehitwonder I'm the kind of neurodivergent that makes empathy not work right and let me tell you this shit is not beneficial. You should celebrate your empathy because if society was entirely people like me it wouldn't work at all.
Show threadJay Stephens1d ago
@xoli @USSJoshuaNorton @nonehitwonder thank you for saying this. This kind of self awareness is rare.
This kind of self awareness combined with honesty, rarer still.
Show threadXoli1d ago

@jaystephens @USSJoshuaNorton @nonehitwonder At some point while I was homeless ~7 years ago I realized that individual humans don't survive alone so if I wanted to not freeze to death in an alleyway somewhere I had to at least learn to pretend to understand how other people feel. Since people can't read minds (as much as many would like to believe empathy lets them) my motivations are unknowable to them and if I act in the way I think an empathetic person would their brains fill in the blanks and perceive me as feeling empathy even though in reality I'm not feeling anything.

Me masking my ASPD is pretty much entirely for the sake of avoiding social punishment. It's a lot of conscious effort to pay attention to facial expressions, tone of voice, and all the other indicators of someone's emotional state to try to figure out how they're feeling but in the past few years I've found people I can be honest with and they still care about me even knowing what I am and getting to have friends is pretty tight. I still can't share in anything they feel which means I can't form meaningful emotional connections so it's a pretty lonely life even with people who care about me around.

Seeing books like Robert Greene's "48 Laws of Power" sell well or politicians talking about the "sin of empathy" honestly baffles me because I can't imagine why anybody would want to self-impose the kind of emotional isolation I don't have a choice but to live with. Division of labor and interdependence are the things that made our species successful in the first place. If you look at the evolutionary arms race that shaped our species, humans are really squishy and pretty bad at everything that isn't innovating new ways to throw rocks or working together. Even if it doesn't come naturally to me, I still have to figure out how to fit into the mold of my species if I want to succeed.

Show threadNone Hitwonder1d ago
@xoli @jaystephens @USSJoshuaNorton What a fantastic and thoughtful response! Thank you for sharing your experience. 💚🖖🏼
Show threadChookMother 🇦🇺🦘21h ago
@xoli Thanks for your insight.
Show threadJuan Per¢ent,🇲🇽 🍉2d ago
@USSJoshuaNorton @nonehitwonder OK but, to quote a great engineer, “The fundamental weakness of western civilization is empathy,” 
Show threadLebramor1d ago
@dacig @USSJoshuaNorton @nonehitwonder you misspelled billionaire fraud.
Show threadNone Hitwonder1d ago
@dacig @USSJoshuaNorton I've definitely never heard an engineer say that; in fact, the person who said that does not even have a degree in engineering.
Show threadSpace Hobo1d ago
@USSJoshuaNorton @nonehitwonder I always contradict people who use "fit" to mean "muscular and physically powerful" in everyday speech, pointing out that the worms in dung are evolved to perfectly fit their ecological niche.
Show threadMartin Vermeer FCD1d ago
@spacehobo @USSJoshuaNorton @nonehitwonder Well yes. The literal meaning of 'fit' is 'best adapted', fitting in with their environment. This is also the Darwinian meaning. Keep pointing it out!
Show threadfeliz1d ago

@USSJoshuaNorton @nonehitwonder

Darwin himself wrote in 'The Descent of Man' (1871) that morality is not uniquely human, but rather a naturally occurring trait that has developed from social instincts. He described that compassion, care for others and cooperation are present in many animals and have been further developed in humans through intelligence, language and reflection.

He described that societies with strong emphasis on morality and cooperation would have an evolutionary advantage.

Show threadcy1d ago
Survival of the fittest was coined by Herbert Spencer, an enthusiastic supremist and eugenicist. Darwin never spoke in those terms, calling it "Natural Selection." The reason it's bullshit is "fittest" is a misleading term. Natural selection is survival of the barely good enough. Anything better, Ma Nature no care she lazy!

And who cares if we're better or worse at surviving? That's how they get you to stop people from surviving, for the crime of not surviving. If they won't survive, you don't have to help step on them. But if you do that, the ultra-wealthy will benefit greatly from your self-destructive obedience to their lies.

Like, would you only show compassion because it benefits a population? No, you show it because you're not a fucking asshole, and you like people! Maybe it benefits the population, but that'll work itself out, doesn't need our attention.

CC: @nonehitwonder@tenforward.social
Show threadJB 🐎 22h ago

@cy @USSJoshuaNorton @nonehitwonder

Yes, Darwin even used the phrase himself.

This is a comprehensive resource to learn more about the history:

https://www.nature.com/scitable/blog/accumulating-glitches/the_meaning_of_fitness/

TLDR; The term has been vastly misinterpreted to mean something other than what it meant in biology, where it originated. “Fitness” refers to passing on genetics or phenotypes to the next generation, and doesn’t even need to involve someone having children of their own. There are many diverse examples in nature where family support each other, and other cooperative relationships, even between species, that are crucial to the next generation’s survival.

It is absolutely about “good enough”, and that does not have one, single definition.

The Meaning of Fitness | Accumulating Glitches | Learn Science at Scitable

Fitness is a central concept of evolution and one of the most commonly misunderstood. What does it actually mean, and what are the misunderstandings?

Show threadAndré1d ago
@USSJoshuaNorton @nonehitwonder AFAIK Darwin didn't even use the phrase or at least not "fittest", but just said what basically is "survival of the fit" meaning being able to survive the conditions, not "the individual best at surviving" those conditions.
So, exactly as you say!
Show threadAndré1d ago
@USSJoshuaNorton @nonehitwonder Just had to look it up now, and of course it was an economist who misframed fitness (and got Darwin to use it too, but seems he still used "fittest" in the group sense) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survival_of_the_fittest?wprov=sfla1
Survival of the fittest - Wikipedia

Show threadoften frowned upon1d ago
@USSJoshuaNorton @nonehitwonder if "survival of the fittest" meant what they think it means, we would consist primarily of cancer cells
Show threadthe hatter1d ago
@USSJoshuaNorton @nonehitwonder There's still a proportionality involved, even so. A population that can save the occasional one like this is a positive. A population which saves ones with some problem that cause this to happen more often will lead to more finding themselves in this sort of peril, but not always with others around to save them. Or what happens when a predator enters the pool in the middle of this.