Do you believe humans are a part of nature?

[coosjoaquin]

Originally Posted by TKramar

I don't agree...only the "strong" should survive. If you're part of the herd that is weak, you get culled.

I dont care if you agree or not. The strongest or fastest of animals cannot compare to those that work together to achieve a common goal. The most fit to survive are those that can put aside personal gain and work for the collective good. Please please check out altruism and game theory

Game theory - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Altruism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[MontanaGuy]

TKramer wrote:

I don't agree...only the "strong" should survive. If you're part of the herd that is weak, you get culled.

I remember once when I was in Denali National Park in Alaska and you have to take buses into the park and leave your vehicle at the campground. A park ranger was talking about the wildlife in the park and he described how a pack of wolves surrounded a grizzly bear with two cubs and it was witnessed by some of the rangers at a distance. They attacked as a team and managed to get one of the cubs. A single wolf would be ripped to pieces by a grizzly bear. Coosjoaquin is exactly right. Life is much more complex than the statement "only the strong survive". There are many species of animals who coordinate their efforts in order to survive. In fact man is a perfect example. A single man without support from others or technology wouldn't stand a chance with an animal like a grizzly bear. We're not particularly strong, fast or physically able to defeat a large predator. If it were true that only the strong survive then man would already be extinct.

[Tricky D]

Originally Posted by MontanaGuy

Life is much more complex than the statement "only the strong survive".

It is a sign of weakness to deny the fact that there is strength in numbers. But true strength lies in accepting the truth; being able to adapt to a different strategy.
So believing that there is only strength in numbers is also a weakness.

[TKramar]

Originally Posted by MontanaGuy

TKramer wrote:

I remember once when I was in Denali National Park in Alaska and you have to take buses into the park and leave your vehicle at the campground. A park ranger was talking about the wildlife in the park and he described how a pack of wolves surrounded a grizzly bear with two cubs and it was witnessed by some of the rangers at a distance. They attacked as a team and managed to get one of the cubs. A single wolf would be ripped to pieces by a grizzly bear. Coosjoaquin is exactly right. Life is much more complex than the statement "only the strong survive". There are many species of animals who coordinate their efforts in order to survive. In fact man is a perfect example. A single man without support from others or technology wouldn't stand a chance with an animal like a grizzly bear. We're not particularly strong, fast or physically able to defeat a large predator. If it were true that only the strong survive then man would already be extinct.

How many of your "big cats" are solitary hunters?

[Cirbryn]

Originally Posted by TKramar

How many of your "big cats" are solitary hunters?

Why should it matter? We're just saying that cooperative group living can be an advantageous strategy, and that therefore "survival of the fittest" doesn't necessarily lead to lack of cooperation or lack of altruism. No one's saying cooperative living is the only advantageous strategy.