From a systemic point of view, if we wish to evolutionarily induce our descendants (descendants of the current human race on the whole) to live longer lives, we would need to pro-create later.
If the whole of human race enforced a statute that prohibits pro-creation before the age of 40, then two pronged dynamics would happen
- only adults fit enough to pro-create after 40 would produce off-springs.
- only off-springs born to parents older than 40 who are fit enough would survive.
Since, there is a high tendency of abnormality and low survival of off-springs born to parents of older ages, absence of resource contention and genetic dynamics would encourage the initial propagation of the rare few fit off-springs.
Hence, unnatural "natural selection" would encourage the propagation of humans of longer life-spans. Perhaps, a natural disaster or viral outbreak could discourage humans from pro-creating before age 40. Perhaps, high rates of abortion. So long as the human race does not die out due to such restrictions. Perhaps, to the satisfaction of conspiracy lovers, a secretive organisation carries out a plan every 100K years to raise the bar for child-bearing age.
Therefore, it might be less of a question of advantage and more of the effects of motivation. That current status where
- high motivation for humans to pro-create early in life.
- low motivation for humans to have more children as they wise-up by being tired of raising kids too early.
Therefore, since no such secret organisation exists, there is infinitesimally little motivation for the existence of a "super-virus" type of humans to exist.
There is no motivation for super-humans to exist, because the distribution of life-spans have crowded out the food and survival resources of any possible primeval super-human.
No comments:
Post a Comment