Evolution and Public Policy
Because the Utah Legislature has struggled recently on some evolution issues, I thought a tutorial might be helpful.
Organisms have different traits. Some of those traits will be better adapted to certain conditions and situations. Organisms with preferred traits will have a better chance of surviving and reproducing. Offspring inheriting those traits, likewise, will have a better chance of surviving and passing on the genetic trait to their offspring. On and on it goes, until the differences are so pronounced that we have actual speciation – two distinct species.
The opposable thumb made primates the rock stars of the animal kingdom. Once again, the thumb promises to stir things up.
In today’s world, human “fast thumbers” have an advantage over “slow thumbers.” Organizational and productivity tools allow people to do more and do it faster. Unfortunately for “slow thumbers,” the interfaces on those tools are becoming smaller and smaller. Thus, humans with thin, nimble thumbs can operate the tools better – thereby gaining organizational and productivity superiority over humans with beefy, clunky thumbs.
The text messages of fast thumbers come back quicker, with better spelling, suggesting to potential mates superior intellect and, with that, superior chances to provide and nurture. Hence, fast thumbers mate and pass on to their offspring fast-thumbing genes. The offspring, then, are better adapted to and more successful with small interfaces. And on and on. Fair? Probably not. But evolution has no concern for fairness.
Thomas Martel, a 28-year old slow thumber, has spotted the trend. No doubt attempting to improve his chances of biological success, Martel had his thumb bones surgically shaved and his thumb nails and muscles altered to become a fast thumber. Those surgical alterations, of course, are not heritable. Thus, unless Martel confessed to the surgery, potential mates would not know that genetically he is a slow thumber. They, later, would be surprised that their children have beefy, clunky thumbs.
The issue is fraught with legal, ethical and scientific complexities. But, a situation that literally threatens to divide the human species clearly cries out for legislative consideration. A few possibilities include (1) banning iThumb surgery, (2) requiring a registry of iThumb patients, or (3) prohibiting graphic interfaces with keys smaller than some designated point on the surficial thumb index (STI). Needless to say, we’ll need our best minds to work on a solution.
Organisms have different traits. Some of those traits will be better adapted to certain conditions and situations. Organisms with preferred traits will have a better chance of surviving and reproducing. Offspring inheriting those traits, likewise, will have a better chance of surviving and passing on the genetic trait to their offspring. On and on it goes, until the differences are so pronounced that we have actual speciation – two distinct species.
The opposable thumb made primates the rock stars of the animal kingdom. Once again, the thumb promises to stir things up.
In today’s world, human “fast thumbers” have an advantage over “slow thumbers.” Organizational and productivity tools allow people to do more and do it faster. Unfortunately for “slow thumbers,” the interfaces on those tools are becoming smaller and smaller. Thus, humans with thin, nimble thumbs can operate the tools better – thereby gaining organizational and productivity superiority over humans with beefy, clunky thumbs.
The text messages of fast thumbers come back quicker, with better spelling, suggesting to potential mates superior intellect and, with that, superior chances to provide and nurture. Hence, fast thumbers mate and pass on to their offspring fast-thumbing genes. The offspring, then, are better adapted to and more successful with small interfaces. And on and on. Fair? Probably not. But evolution has no concern for fairness.
Thomas Martel, a 28-year old slow thumber, has spotted the trend. No doubt attempting to improve his chances of biological success, Martel had his thumb bones surgically shaved and his thumb nails and muscles altered to become a fast thumber. Those surgical alterations, of course, are not heritable. Thus, unless Martel confessed to the surgery, potential mates would not know that genetically he is a slow thumber. They, later, would be surprised that their children have beefy, clunky thumbs.
The issue is fraught with legal, ethical and scientific complexities. But, a situation that literally threatens to divide the human species clearly cries out for legislative consideration. A few possibilities include (1) banning iThumb surgery, (2) requiring a registry of iThumb patients, or (3) prohibiting graphic interfaces with keys smaller than some designated point on the surficial thumb index (STI). Needless to say, we’ll need our best minds to work on a solution.
posted by steve u. at 8/11/2007
Subscribe
7 Comments:
"...suggesting to potential mates superior intellect and, with that, superior chances to provide and nurture."
Since when did women seek for superior intellect? Fatter thumbs would suggest bigger muscles.
Spelling errors = hunk.
That's a possibility I hadn't considered. I think we're making progress.
This may be the most brilliant post I've seen this year!
I'm in awe of the relentless will of my family and its hangers-on to impose on all creatures our inherited knowledge and capabilities.
How simple it all seems when laid out like this.
Can it be that the powers that be are subverting natural selection by designing their devices so that slow thumbers, who would otherwise be naturally superior and rule the world, are being placed at an artificial disadvantage?
Speaking of thumb size... or was that foot size...oh wait, never mind.
VOU,
I'm onm my PDA -- so shotr answert. The thoughtr has cfrossed my mindf.
This is great stuff. I think we can all expect to see winter gloves that show off a little thumb cleavage.
Post a Comment
<< Home