[tomdemaine]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It's betterfor the survival of the species if we group together and penalise the strong to help the weak.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is one of the most disgusting things I've ever heard. You just claimed that success should be punished, and stupidity rewarded.

This does NOT help the survival of the species, and it is completely contrary to evolutionary principles. "Survival of the fittest" means that the monkey who was too stupid not to eat the poisoned berries doesn't go on to infect the world with his stupidity.

[/ QUOTE ]

I absolutly knew that someone would take this the wrong way. Survival of the fittest is a complete misnomer. It may benefit nature as a whole if we let the "weak" die out but the human species is more likely to survive if we have as diverse a range of people as possible. How does it help the monkeys if through their inaction, a prospective mate dies of poisioned berries? Because in another few million years they'll become a "better" species. If one day a parasite emerges that feeds on brainwaves we'll need stupid people around to continue the species. High IQ, risk taking behaviours, the things that the market value are not the only important aspects of humanity. Don't be so arrogant to think that you can affect the billion year process of natural selection by cutting off a few welfare cheques. That's not how it works.