Well, of course, the
ultimate arrogance of the Social Darwinist/Eugenics movements was the belief
that they knew who was "fit", without ever investigating it. So far as I can
tell, gang members are, in general, more fit than people
in the same
immediate environment who are not members of gangs.
If you are
trying to change the environment, so that some other set of phenotypes is more
fit, you might well get annoyed that the gangs don't want their world changed,
but that doesn't mean they are not well adapted to their circumstances. Think
of any old western with a gang in it... prior to the wandering protagonist...
who is doing better, the townspeople or the gang?
Eric
On Thu,
Sep 27, 2012 11:53 AM,
glen <[hidden email]>
wrote:
Douglas Roberts wrote at 09/26/2012 09:03 PM:
> dead gang members are far more productive members of society than
> live ones, I suspect.
And here I was worried I wouldn't get enough _hate_ in my diet today.
--
glen
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
------------
Eric Charles
Assistant Professor
of Psychology
Penn State University
Altoona, PA 16601
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College