From: Damien Broderick (damienb@unimelb.edu.au)
Date: Tue Jul 22 2003 - 22:09:51 MDT
At 10:12 PM 7/22/03 -0400, Robin Hanson wrote:
>given that evolution rules, the only natural preferences
>are those that result in the "most" progeny, regardless of other
consequences.
Yes, this explains why all the couples I know have twenty children, like J.
S. Bach.
Oh, wait. Those scare quotes grant that numerical most =/= "most", as the
latter implies a more subtle metric than simple head-count of offspring in
any given generation.
Mightn't we have an aperture here allowing for a stationary future
population? Especially if the principal replicators are not bodies or even
individual uploads but powerfully competitive intrapsychic memes?
Damien Broderick
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Jul 22 2003 - 22:17:35 MDT