Replacements for "Survival of the Fittest"

[Uncayimmy]

Here is an example where the environment changes radically. Mr. Bean is not fit, and then, due to a shift in environment, he is.

The above quote got me to thinking yet again that scientists need to hire a PR firm to come up with new catch phrases. Survival of the fittest has a lot of weakness. For many people, being "fit" simply means being in good physical shape when in the context of evolution it means "best suited at the time to reproduce and have those offspring reproduce." Survival itself is taken by many to simply mean living longer when really we're talking about the continuation of the species.

Survival of the fittest is brief. It kind of rolls off the tongue. But in many ways it seems to be more trouble than it's worth. Any suggestions for replacements?

Continuation of the most well adapted?
Continuation of the genetically best suited at the time?

[Hokulele]

Any suggestions for replacements?


*********** lucky.

[Staropeace]

Survival of the wealthiest.

[Trent Wray]

*********** lucky. I like it. But I could be biased, as the tattoo on my right shoulder says this ;)

-----

How about, "everything dies." :)

[Uncayimmy]

*********** lucky.

You know, I was actually thinking of something along those lines because there does seem to be a common misconception that these genetic changes come about because the species somehow "knows" it needs a mutation to survive. In reality, all those proto-giraffes were laughed at as long-necked geeks, only they got the last laugh.

[Hallo Alfie]

I know what's mine now get outta the way.

[Trent Wray]

I know what's mine now get outta the way. And I respond with "no it's not" + *bang ur dead* :clap:

[Lucian]

You know, I was actually thinking of something along those lines because there does seem to be a common misconception that these genetic changes come about because the species somehow "knows" it needs a mutation to survive. In reality, all those proto-giraffes were laughed at as long-necked geeks, only they got the last laugh.

Survival of the misfitest.

Or,

Whoops! No, wait, that could actually work.

[Earthborn]

How about:

“It is not the most intelligent or strongest who survive, it is the most adaptable to change.”
Charles “monkey in the family” Darwin.

[rjh01]

Survival of the groups with the most breeding children.

Needs some work to reduce the number of words.

[Delvo]

Whatever works works.

If it works, it works.

[Hallo Alfie]

Mutants rule.

[Ririon]

It may be a bit unoriginal, but what about:

Natural selectionTM

[Mirrorglass]

Survival of the groups with the most breeding children.

Needs some work to reduce the number of words.

Survival of the catholics.

[Hokulele]

Hm, I thought I had masked my implied profanity, but someone/thing edited it and added four more asterisks.

Mutation in action!

[Trent Wray]

Survival of the groups with the most breeding children.

Needs some work to reduce the number of words. Survival of the horniest.

[Trent Wray]

Survival of the groups with the most breeding children.

Needs some work to reduce the number of words.Survival of the catholics Mormons.:)

[shadron]

The above quote got me to thinking yet again that scientists need to hire a PR firm to come up with new catch phrases. Survival of the fittest has a lot of weakness. For many people, being "fit" simply means being in good physical shape when in the context of evolution it means "best suited at the time to reproduce and have those offspring reproduce." Survival itself is taken by many to simply mean living longer when really we're talking about the continuation of the species.

Survival of the fittest is brief. It kind of rolls off the tongue. But in many ways it seems to be more trouble than it's worth. Any suggestions for replacements?

Continuation of the most well adapted?
Continuation of the genetically best suited at the time?

I've tried to think of one as well, without success. In the case I presented above, Hokulele's first suggestion does well, but it's not comprehensive enough. I'm sure Darwin had the same problem, as he had a fine feel for the aimlessness of evolution. I don't think you can do better in three english words; it's too bad that fit was co-opted by the gymnasium crowd.

[Dancing David]

It is complex so it is hard to encapsulate in a sound byte that has an appeal to emotions as well

"Reproductive success in uanticipated environments" just doesn'r carry the appeal of 'survival of the fittest'.

[HansMustermann]

"Whatever works best, works best."

[sphenisc]

Compatibility confers continuity

[BlackCat]

I personally use "survival of the adequate." Nature rarely excels or is perfect.

[shadron]

I personally use "survival of the adequate." Nature rarely excels or is perfect.

Depends on what you mean by adequate. It could mean mediocre, which I disagree with, because the better idea wins, not the average idea. It could mean adequate in the sense of adequate to overcome all the others, which is not a really common sense usage. True, nature rarely excels, but it does refine when the environment stays constant and mildly unpleasant.

[Ferguson]

Survival of the survivor.
Also referred to as: He that reproduces, reproduces.

[blutoski]

The above quote got me to thinking yet again that scientists need to hire a PR firm to come up with new catch phrases. Survival of the fittest has a lot of weakness. For many people, being "fit" simply means being in good physical shape when in the context of evolution it means "best suited at the time to reproduce and have those offspring reproduce." Survival itself is taken by many to simply mean living longer when really we're talking about the continuation of the species.

Survival of the fittest is brief. It kind of rolls off the tongue. But in many ways it seems to be more trouble than it's worth. Any suggestions for replacements?

Continuation of the most well adapted?
Continuation of the genetically best suited at the time?

Please don't take this as an attempt to derail, but "[[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survival_of_the_fittest]survivial of the fittest[url]]" is not a scientific description.

It's not used by scientists in a scientific context, so I'm not convinced that scientists will have any impact on its vernacular use by choosing a substitute.

"Natural selection," is the closest scientific term of which I'm aware and it's pretty succinct. I'd stick with that.

[Trent Wray]

Continuity of the Probable :)

[Gord_in_Toronto]

It is the Survival of the Best Adapted. ;)

[mijopaalmc]

"Whoever dies with the most descendants wins."

[Jeff Corey]

"Survival of the fittest" always struck me as a bit circular and not very satisfying as an explanation of the mechanism.

[HansMustermann]

Depends on what you mean by adequate. It could mean mediocre, which I disagree with, because the better idea wins, not the average idea. It could mean adequate in the sense of adequate to overcome all the others, which is not a really common sense usage. True, nature rarely excels, but it does refine when the environment stays constant and mildly unpleasant.

Actually, in a sense it _is_ average. Or probably more correctly "the best compromise."

Evolution only rarely goes for just absolute biggest, strongest, toughest mofo.

E.g., something too fast, will require more food, and might get itself the first to die in the next food shortage. Or it might involve other tradeoffs, like the Cheetah's having only endurance for a rather short time of that sprint, and if it missed the prey twice or thrice, it will starve for less of energy to sprint again. It will also need to be as lightweight as possible, sacrificing strength for that speed, and a more balanced species could beat the snot out of it and take its territory. It needs a pretty specialized ecosystem to be able to even exist at all, much less out-compete other species.

E.g., conversely something too big and strong, will also be slower. A liger (epic mount sized crossbreed of lion and tiger) for example wouldn't be a good hunter if you dumped him in the savannah. Heck, even the male lion is too big and slow to hunt most game solo, which is why the females do most hunting. When the male lion is even used for hunting, it's in ambush and the females drive the prey towards him. It's again a very specialized niche, and in a different ecosystem, _less_ dimorphism or all around less size and strength might actually be the "fittest" version.

E.g., smarter also means a disproportionately higher need for oxygen, glucose _and_ proteins for the brain, and that's just the start of the problems. A devolution to being much much dumber is what secured a viable niche for koalas.

From certain specialized extremes, given the right environment changes, a fallback to a more "average" configuration can actually be an advantage.

Well, not "average" in the sense of less fit to the environment, but certainly more average in the sense of "fit" or "excel" that gets misused by modern proponents of eugenics. (Not meaning "you", but just to frame the meaning I'm talking about.) In the common language meaning of "fit" or "excel", the meaning mis-understood by most when they hear "survival of the fittest", nature actually rarely produces something _too_ fit, and only rarely something that really excels.

[Uncayimmy]

It's not used by scientists in a scientific context, so I'm not convinced that scientists will have any impact on its vernacular use by choosing a substitute.
That it's not used by scientists discussing it with each other is irrelevant. It's encountered by any scientist or educator dealing with the general public. I say it easily confuses as much as enlightens people, so it would be behoove them to consider a better way of phrasing it.

"Natural selection," is the closest scientific term of which I'm aware and it's pretty succinct. I'd stick with that.
Well, it doesn't have to occur "naturally" and "selection" is vague and implies an act of will. A bowling ball doesn't "select" what pins get knocked down but the bowler selects where to aim. If you want to get away from a creator or some other "intelligent designer" being in the picture, stop using language that implies a will.

My point is that there's a body of knowledge required to understand evolution, and there are many levels of understanding. If you're going to have a pithy phrase, it's best if that pithy phrase leads to understanding rather than confusion.

For example, a black hole seems a pretty good term for laypersons like myself. Black, meaning that light doesn't escape and hole, meaning stuff falls into it (things fall because of gravity). If they called it an ebony super attractor, that would be a bit misleading because I would think that it somehow attracts things beyond (super) what I normally know about the forces of the universe when in reality it's "just" plain old gravity run amok. Ebony makes me think of a dark color rather than an absence of light.

[Ririon]

Well, it doesn't have to occur "naturally" and "selection" is vague and implies an act of will. A bowling ball doesn't "select" what pins get knocked down but the bowler selects where to aim. If you want to get away from a creator or some other "intelligent designer" being in the picture, stop using language that implies a will.
It only implies an act of will if it doesn't occur "naturally". It is natural selection as opposed to artificial/intelligent/willful selection.

Obviously it raises more questions than it answers, but it raises good questions. "What do you mean? How can nature select?"

"Survival of the fittest" is oversimplified and creates misunderstandings from the outset: "What? So the guy with the biggest biceps survives? Is THAT your explanation for all the wonders of nature?"

Evolution can not be explained in four words or less. What you need is four words or less to finish the sentence: "Oh, [natural phenomenon]? It all boils down to..."

Then you can continue with "You see, this is how it works..." or you can answer hopefully productive follow-up questions.

And (appeal to authority) "natural selection" is in the title of The Origin.

[Uncayimmy]

It only implies an act of will if it doesn't occur "naturally". It is natural selection as opposed to artificial/intelligent/willful selection.
Put some bacteria in a petri dish and introduce something that favors a mutation. Is that natural or not? Hell, there are few dozen dictionary definitions for nature/natural, so it's immediately ambiguous to laypersons, and they are the target audience.

I also forgot to mention that sometimes none or all get "selected." For some people that doesn't count as selecting.

Obviously it raises more questions than it answers, but it raises good questions. "What do you mean? How can nature select?"
Right, nature cannot select. God did it. Therefore, natural selection is wrong. Need further proof? They say it's the survival of the fittest, yet we see lots of "weak" animals all the time.

Evolution can not be explained in four words or less. What you need is four words or less to finish the sentence: "Oh, [natural phenomenon]? It all boils down to..."
That's true, but that doesn't mean we can strive for something better than what we have. Like it or not, some people latch on to these terms and build their "understanding" to fit the idea they get from simple but commonly heard phrases. It's not any easy task. Maybe we should have a spiritualist contact David Ogilvy.

[Ririon]

Like it or not, some people latch on to these terms and build their "understanding" to fit the idea they get from simple but commonly heard phrases. It's not any easy task. Maybe we should have a spiritualist contact David Ogilvy.
Evolution - one quarter moisturizing cream... Nah... :p

[Piscivore]

I personally use "survival of the adequate."

But... he got banned. :confused:

[Brainache]

Survival of the offspring.

Or,

Please, think of the children...

[blutoski]

That it's not used by scientists discussing it with each other is irrelevant. It's encountered by any scientist or educator dealing with the general public. I say it easily confuses as much as enlightens people, so it would be behoove them to consider a better way of phrasing it.

Done and done: we say 'natural selection.'




Well, it doesn't have to occur "naturally"...

I'm pretty sure it does.



...and "selection" is vague and implies an act of will. A bowling ball doesn't "select" what pins get knocked down but the bowler selects where to aim. If you want to get away from a creator or some other "intelligent designer" being in the picture, stop using language that implies a will.

That paragraph seems to be self-contradicting. The word 'natural' certainly seems to imply that this is not a 'supernatural' explanation.




My point is that there's a body of knowledge required to understand evolution, and there are many levels of understanding. If you're going to have a pithy phrase, it's best if that pithy phrase leads to understanding rather than confusion.

For example, a black hole seems a pretty good term for laypersons like myself. Black, meaning that light doesn't escape and hole, meaning stuff falls into it (things fall because of gravity). If they called it an ebony super attractor, that would be a bit misleading because I would think that it somehow attracts things beyond (super) what I normally know about the forces of the universe when in reality it's "just" plain old gravity run amok. Ebony makes me think of a dark color rather than an absence of light.

I think you're overthinking this.

[blutoski]

"Survival of the fittest" is oversimplified and creates misunderstandings from the outset: "What? So the guy with the biggest biceps survives? Is THAT your explanation for all the wonders of nature?"

[The first rule of Zombieland: Cardio. (http://www.google.ca/search?q=zombieland+cardio&hl=en&tbs=vid:1&tbo=u&ei=kuKjS5OOH4_UsQPNxoS9BA&sa=X&oi=video_result_group&ct=title&resnum=1&ved=0CBEQqwQwAA)]

[Uncayimmy]

I think you're overthinking this.
So noted.

[Xephyr]

Hmm...

Do or Die ?

Sink or Swim ?

Kill or Be Killed ?

Don't Eat Spam and Take Off Those Speedos ?

Survival of The Most Seed Spreaders ?

Last One In Is A Rotten Egg ?

The Last Man Standing ? (aka : The Only Guy Who Never Pissed Off A Woman)

:eusa_think:

[blutoski]

Hmm...

Do or Die ?

"Do or do not. There is no try."

[Trent Wray]

"Survival by those whom Chuck Norris allows to survive"

[Lucian]

"Survival by those whom Chuck Norris allows to survive"

Wouldn't that mean that creationists are the only ones fit to survive and evolve?

[Trent Wray]

Wouldn't that mean that creationists are the only ones fit to survive and evolve? If you're questioning me, that's one thing. If you're questioning Chuck (http://www.chucknorrisfacts.com/), I am glad I am nowhere near you ...

[blobru]

Persistence of the persistent

or

Dispersion with variation of the inheritable tendencies of the most durable and fertile

or

Native fads that make lads mad and get maids laid get madly made and fail to fade

or

Revenge of the Horny Freaks