@Aedes,
Aedes wrote:There are some very large inaccuracies here that you speak of as if it's biological truth. First of all, it's striking how many people on this forum speak of biological processes teleologically, as if they innately have some goal in mind. They don't. There is NO "ultimate goal of any biological entity" -- this is one of the most rudimentary points of all biological science!!! Biological processes are what they are and do what they do; and by several methods (including but absolutely not limited to natural selection) certain biological properties increase in prevalence within populations.
Yes I could've chosen better words. I never meant to imply that there is some intelligence behind evolution or a set-in-stone path that it follows towards an already set goal. What I meant to say is that, from my own point of view as an observer,
it appears that evolution tends toward a goal, that is (among others, of course) prolonging the life of an organism to make sure it can reproduce repeatedly (speed, camouflage, protective shells, etc)
Aedes wrote:
Secondly, postponing death is NOT the fundamental determinant of natural selection, not even close!! The fundamental determinant is reproductive fitness. Its interest in death stops at organisms surviving to reproductive age and their offspring subsequently surviving to reproduce.
But isn't postponing death and ensuring more offspring are created pretty important too ?
Aedes wrote:But before you wax poetic about immortality, realize the following:
1) biological senscence (aging) is associated with worse reproductive outcomes, like chromosomal errors, so having the elderly reproduce is NOT in the interest of populations
2) for species with altricious offspring, as we have, the great length of time to rear and raise children also belies the logic in old parents
3) some species, like some salmon, mate once and then die; other species die immediately after mating or the female kills the male (like mantids and other insects); and some species live in communities in which most individuals never mate in their entire life (bees) -- clearly evolution has brought these qualities about.
Then aren't organisms who live longer considered "young" for a longer period of time, thus having more time available to reproduce without errors ?
Thanks for replying, I'm not a biologist. What do you think about my idea of 'fear' as useful from an evolutionary point of view and how the invented idea of 'afterlife' could be related to it ?
(Not a word Aedes! j/k 
)
