View source for Debate:Does Darwinian natural selection suggest that bigotry is a necessary self-defense mechanism?

And how would it do this again? [[User:Linus M.|Liπus the Turbogeek]]<sup>([[User talk:Linus M.|contact me]])</sup> 10:31, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

I was thinking the same thing.  Honestly, bigotry and racism are pretty much the antithesis of Darwinian evolution, for many reasons.  Requirement of genetic diversity, adaption to environments, etc.  People who actually state this haven't an idea of Darwinism.
::Actully, xenophobes are much more likely to survive in nature.[[User:Jaques|Jaques]] 08:48, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

'''excuse me?''' We are sentient enough to be racist, it does'nt depend on evolution

Umm. People were racist well before Darwin's Theories came about. Frankly I don't see where there can be a debate about this. Rellik

: I love it when people start up a debate just to prove a point. [[User:Wikinterpreter|Wikinterpreter]]

! Tribalism creates cooperation and social bonding within a group and so is a positive attribute as far as evolution goes. Evolution doesn't care about genetic diversity - as long as a new trait helps the owner of the DNA, that trait will flourish. It is entirely consistent with evolutionary theory that a trait can evolve and become dominant because it is sucessful in the short term, only to nearly wipe the species out because it is so damaging in the long term. As for adaptation to environment - any new trait that helps the owners of a gene increase their reproductive success IS adaptation to environment. In this sense, bigotry, at the time of its emergence, was a positive adaptation to the social environment.

So, bigotry is a trait that was succesfull in the short-term and so became widespread, but now it is becoming an increasing hazard to humanity and may eventually wipe us out! Curlyhead2000.

:::What??? That makes no sense! Evolution is strictly put to DNA and physical attributes/parts controlled by DNA such as instincts, habituation etc. Bigotry is taught by others to others, its not a natural thing. There is no proof to show that Bigotry is genetic, and it is by far not a safe assumption. The only exception could be imprinting, but because someone is a bigot does not mean that they can physically reproduce better than someone who isn't, or that they can create more offspring. Being a bigot is simply a state of mind, not an [[inherited trait]].

-Bigotry is another word for "mischanneled human agression", and agression is a trait we all share.- Anonymous

I thought that this statement was true, that for social species, you want to stamp out people who are different, because, not necessarily at a logical level, but at some instinctual level you'd want people with genes like yours, or close to yours, to survive more.  Examples of this being when a new alpha male lion takes over a pride of females, he will commonly kill the cubs of the preceding alpha male, ensuring that only his genes are passed on.[[User:Vikten|Vikten]] 17:07, 18 October 2010 (EDT)

Xenophobia is a much more accurate term. Bigotry has to do with when people are unwillingly cohesing with those people that they are xenophobic to.

[[Category:Conservapedia Debates]]