Tuesday, July 10, 2007

Survival Of The Fittest

Darwin once proposed a very famous theory, "survival of the fittest". The phrase is a shorthand of a concept relating to competition of survival or predominance.
Originally applied by Herbert Spencer in his Principles of Biology of 1864, Spencer drew parallels to his ideas of economics with Charles Darwin's theories of evolution by what Darwin termed natural selection.
The phrase is a metaphor, not a scientific description; and it is not generally used by biologists, who almost exclusively prefer to use the phrase "natural selection".While the British economist Herbert Spencer is often credited with introducing the phrase "survival of the fittest" in his 1851 work Social Statics (relating to free market economics) or his First Principles of a New system of Philosophy of 1862, he actually did not use the phrase until after reading Darwin's Origin of Species. and introduced it in his Principles of Biology of 1864, vol. 1, p. 444, writing "This survival of the fittest, which I have here sought to express in mechanical terms, is that which Mr. Darwin has called 'natural selection', or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life."
Enough with the phrase, I'm just giving you a look into the origin of the phrase. Every time I heard that phrase it reminds me of my youthful days in high school. Oh it seems just yesterday, but no... it's already fourteen years ago. Wow, I'm feeling old suddenly, sniff... And before I'm getting all blues and all wet, shall we continue?
Does the phrase I've mentioned before still applied up until now? If you ask me, yes it is. The phrase was originally termed for animals, because they are fighting against each other to find food or just to guard their territory. In their world it is either kill or to be killed, hence the term natural selection, the strongest will survive and the weak will be slaved or extinguished.
In todays world, kill or to be killed is not literally applied but it happens in our daily activities. Here is to give you an example. A person come to an office and applied for a job, after an interview and some tests, that person is hired. But because he/she is still new, he/she has to follow a probation test for three months. A contract has been signed and now he/she can work at his/her new office. Daily routines coming up, feeling a little bit bored, and not satisfied with the working conditions (salary probably). Go online and then find a new job opportunity that meets his/her requirements. Feeling lucky, send a resume. Wait for a few days, a call come in his/her mobile asking if she can come to have an interview. To cut the story short, that person is accepted. Now the tough choice comes (it isn't exactly tough because if you look at the salary proposed your decision will be very clear).
The question is, will you take the new job and abandon your current? Not to mention that the probation period is only half way through, but you would also break a gentleman agreement (for women may we call it a lady agreement?) with your current boss. Well, probably those wouldn't be your first considerations. The first thing that would come in mind is your survival, how well your current and your next office can meet your needs. If your criteria is not met by the current, than the h**l with your agreement, it's just a piece of paper right? Just tear it off and fly to wherever the place that would ensure your existence. After all we all just preserving our being in this world, survival is the key. Will you be the fittest? Probably not but surely the most prosperous to be.

Source: Wikipedia

No comments:

Post a Comment