Our school recently went through a massive nostalgia fad. Everyone had their handheld consoles in playing every Pokémon game under the sun.
That is possibly the cutest thing I have ever seen @_@
What The Hell It wasn't even the right theme music, that was the battle music from FFIX D:
He had too much bubblegum icecream =/
Did no-one find the hidden text? =[
Wait, who said anything about efficiency or convenience? I'm talking about survival. It didn't matter how efficient or convenient the effects of a gene were, if the host animal was consistently being killed because of it that gene ceased to be a major influence. Genes are not conscious, just as animals are not sentient. This does not mean there is no prejudice. The environment introduces a prejudice in that if someone does not aid survival it tends to be avoided more and more over time. Not by conscious choice, but because the alternative kills off the genes that do otherwise. This is not efficient by any stretch of the imagination, all it does is ensure that the fittest in that particular environment survives. This can quite easily introduce prejudice.
Really, was there any need?A friend of mine had blue poo before =D
Hierarchical structures in societies are well documented in the animal kingdom also. They prevent the amount of fighting in the group overall thereby increasing the chance any one gene might survive through the generations. All of this behaviour can be easily explained by the fact that it helped our ancestors survive (and by ancestors I mean thousands if not hundreds of thousands of years ago). Also, a difference in a small sample of people proves little. As has been said, current environmental factors can also have an impact. I am just making the point that the origin of prejudiced behaviour is genetic.
Umm, there is? The previous environments that have existed while humans (and our genetic ancestors) were evolving are what turned us into a species that is suspicious of outsiders for the simple reason that we survived better this way.
What experiments? Surely if they are being based on human beings then they are being based on our evolutionary history as well? I have given perfectly sound and reasonable reasons for all of the examples of prejudice mentioned.
A natural part of the learning process for many species. Younger members observe the behaviour of older members and imitate it. This works on the assumption that if they have reached that age then they must be doing something right to survive. A recent study showed that chimps learned how to floss their teeth with human hair from their parents and other older family members by watching them. The older ones also seemed to be actively teaching them, thereby passing it on to the next generation and increasing the chance of the genes surviving. Gang culture is just a smaller version of race culture. It is sort of a sub group. Within species groups form for protection and to aid in the acquisition of food and mates etc. If they meet another group they will probably fight, even though they are members of the same species. Although, in the case of lions, lone lions (which are almost always male) are not accepted into prides as they challenge the dominance of the alpha male. They tend to either form their own prides or take over existing ones. Again, that is learning behaviour. We have evolved in such a way that if we find someone that gives an unpleasant sensation or causes pain signals to be generated then we will be much more unlikely to do it again in the future. This could be called mistrust, and is definitely of genetic origins (if it didn't help us survive it would have died out in the gene pool). I thought the way they justified it was by saying that the people of Africa were sub-human (a very ignorant statement)? They also just copied what the natives did, slavery was a widespread practice in Africa long before the Europeans arrived (although, slaves were captured through war and conflict).
Slavery and prejudice are two completely different concepts. Slavery occurred initially through ignorance and then continued by greed. Prejudice has genetic roots (as I have already stated). Public conditioning can treat ignorance easily (it can be eradicated in one generation) but it will be much harder to wipe out the "genetic" conditioning.
It goes against any and all doctors Hippocratic oaths to let someone die willingly. They would not do such a thing. The only reason they are in a hurry is because organs don't stay viable for very long. Waiting lists for transplants are frustratingly long and many people die before they get the replacement organs that they need. Who are they to decide who lives and who dies? Their son was dead, the best he could do for anyone in that state is to give someone else live. Who could possibly have any objection to that? It is the most amazing gift anyone could give. As for the administrative error in recording the time of brain death, it has caused all of this chaos and a lot of heartache I'm sure =/ But again, having this appear just within the time limit is extremely suspicious. They were probably waiting for peoples memories to fuzz over and hoping for documents to be lost.
It would take many generations to do it. Just because we want to behave a certain way doesn't mean our sub-conscious will let us.
As I said, it would require us going against our very nature. Distrust is a natural defence mechanism to protect us from potentially harmful unknowns. It has become prominent in the gene pool because it was effective at keeping us alive. Basic evolution. I'm not saying that prejudice is a bad thing, it's just that it would almost have to be bred out of us.
The Internet brings down barriers because it removes the physical interaction. If we all met in person there would be the physical barriers caused by the mere sight of the other people (especially if there are noticeable external differences, such as skin colour).
OH SHI-cccc
Lol PV is going to take some getting used to ;D And no, all I was doing was pointing out a trend. No offence intended.
We have evolved to see unknowns and things that are different as threats. We couldn't have survived otherwise. It is instinct for us not to trust what we don't know and to automatically dislike those that are different from us. As for the grouping, that is just our way of organising and making sense of the world. It is much easier and quicker to stick things in a rough group than to deal with everything on an individual basis.
Is it a joke site then? I'm pretty sure I, and many other people, have seen most of them before. Not that they aren't funny.
