INTRODUCTION
When most people think of the phrase, “survival of the fittest” they think of the African lion dominating his pride or the biggest and strongest muscle bound warrior that outfights all the others, they are most desired by the opposite sex, and seem to have a natural gift for success. However despite that popular interpretation, these ideals and image have very little to do with the true meaning behind the statement “survival of the fittest.” There is a misinterpretation about Darwin’s phrase, which it means something that it was never intended to infer. Firstly, “fittest” as it is termed does not reflect the truth of evolution and has absolutely nothing to do with being physically fit. Secondly, evolution is not always on the surface or physically perceived; therefore little to do with how we look.
DISCUSSION
In 1859 Charles Darwin published his most famous work “On the Origins of Life.” in the United Kingdom. Charles Darwin did not invent the term evolution and he was not the first researcher working to understand the development of humanity and all species from a scientific, anthropological perspective. He, in simplest, terms, saw that it the nature of species appeared to favor a process where the weak die and the strong will survive. Darwin focused much of his study are the evolutionary changes that allow some species to be successful throughout time and those that do not. He presented his groundbreaking theory of natural selection at the latter part of the 19th century, which explains that evolution occurs in the form of mutation; the mutations that prevail and are propagated by the species represent the “fittest” individuals worthy of survival. This definition has been taken out of context as the years have gone by (Haxhaj 1).
Many people think that weakness and strength are physical comparisons as well. Not necessarily. People with stronger minds can overcome those whose minds are weaker, and intelligence is so essential to humanity’s identity that it too would play a part. However, the smartest people may not look like the fittest candidates (Gonzalez 1). In a world with potential diseases, pathogens, and bacteria in the world that can harm and kill human beings, regardless of how big and strong or how intelligent they are. However, in these cases, those with the strongest immune systems will prove the most fit to survive. There are many avenues for some humans to be identified as most fit and it may have absolutely nothing to do with physical size or shape.
The first misconception about “survival of the fittest” stems from how people are defining the word “fit.” Again modern people perceive fit as a physical phenomena, an attractive exterior and healthy interior. However, when Darwin used the term he meant something quite different. Fitness as Darwin saw related to genetics. These mutations that encourage change on genetic levels make the passing on these traits more probable. However, these genetic traits may not correlate with those individuals that appear most physically fit (Burkeman 1). It is a modern paradigm that beauty and strength are associated with evolutionary fitness, when that was never the intention. The second major misconception of evolution, natural selection, and “survival of the fittest” is that the biggest, offered perceived as a sign of fitness, is not necessarily what is evolutionarily desirable. A great practical example of this is seen in the way the dinosaurs evolved during the years of their extinction event. Some dinosaurs may have become modern birds. Evolution optioned to favor the genetics that shrank the species size. Under the modern definition of fitness this would not make sense, but sometimes being smaller and compact is far more beneficial for the species as whole. This is why fitness is has very little to do with physicality and size.
CONCLUSION
Again exterior appearances do not dictate that fitness. There is much more to be human than just surviving and being the fittest. Darwin identified his evolutionary principles more than 150 years ago and today researchers are still studying genes, DNA, evolution, in hopes of better understanding our evolution. However we still does not have all of the answers, but we continue to gain new knowledge every day. However, it will likely be many more years before we have the complete picture. Hopefully, humanity will one day be able to embrace the truth of evolution, natural selection, and Darwin’s association with the statement, “survival of the fittest;” and realize that that strength and fitness to survive may be found in the smallest and nearly invisible places inside each of our bodies.
WORK CITED
Burkeman, Oliver. "Why everything you've been told about evolution is wrong." Guardian 18 March 2010, 1. Web. 20 Oct. 2014. <http://www.theguardian.com/science/2010/mar/19/evolution-darwin-natural-selection-genes-wrong>.
Fodor, Jerry, and M. Piattelli-Palmarin. "Survival of the fittest theory: Darwinism's limits." New Scientist. 3 Feb 2013: 1-8. Print.
Gonzalez, Robbie. "Why "Survival of the Fittest" Is Wrong." i09. 5 Mar 2013: 1. Web. 20 Oct. 2014. <http://io9.com/5988401/why-survival-of-the-fittest-is-wrong>.
Haxhaj, E. "Survival of the Fittest." Modern American History. N.p., 21 Sep 2010. Web. 20 Oct. 2014. <http://blogs.baruch.cuny.edu/his1005fall2010/2010/09/21/survival-of-the-fittest/>.
